FTC’s Crackdown on Non-Competes

We are excited to present the latest edition of our renowned resource, the 50-State Non-Compete Desktop Reference, thoughtfully updated by our distinguished Trade Secrets, Computer Fraud, and Non-Competes practice group.

Key Features:

  • Comprehensive Updates: Covering key jurisdictions such as California, New York, and many more.
  • In-Depth Topics: Covers vital aspects such as penalty frameworks, wage thresholds, and notice requirements.
  • Expert Contributions: Draw from the knowledge of our Trade Secrets, Computer Fraud, and Non-Competes practice group.

Access: To access this invaluable resource, click here.

Feel free to reach out to your dedicated Seyfarth attorney for any assistance or questions regarding non-compete and trade secrets law.Continue Reading Seyfarth’s Updated 50-State Non-Compete Desktop Reference – Your Trusted Resource

Wednesday, November 29, 2023
1:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m. Eastern
12:00 p.m. to 1:00 p.m. Central
11:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. Mountain
10:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. Pacific

REGISTER HERE

About the Program

You’re invited to our highly anticipated webinar, where Seyfarth Shaw LLP’s leading attorneys in non-compete law will skillfully guide you through the intricacies of non-compete agreements in the United States, focusing on the latest updates in 2023. This essential webinar will provide exclusive insights from our 2023-2024 edition of the 50-State Desktop Reference.Continue Reading Upcoming Webinar! What Employers Need to Know Regarding Non-Compete Changes in 2023

test

The FTC is not alone in taking aim at non-competes. Yesterday, the NLRB’s General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo issued a memo to all regional directors, officers-in-charge, and resident officers at the NLRB stating that non-competes in employment agreements and severance agreements violate the National Labor Relations Act except in rare circumstances. Specifically, Ms. Abruzzo claims that such covenants interfere with workers’

Continue Reading The NLRB Joins the Fray: Another Attack on Non-Competes

Minnesota is joining the growing list of state legislatures targeting non-compete agreements, and doing so with one of the most aggressive laws in the nation on the subject. Included as part of the Senate Jobs and Economic Development and Labor Omnibus Budget Bill (S.F. 3035), the newly-enacted Minn. Stat. Section 181.988 (“Section 181.988”) categorically bans non-compete agreements with Minnesota workers

Continue Reading Gopher State Goes For Broke with Non-Compete Ban

For those interested in commenting on the FTC’s proposed rule banning nearly all non-competes, today, April 19, is your deadline to do so!

To date, approximately 25,000 comments have been submitted to the FTC, from individuals, corporations, and various industry groups and legal associations. That includes a comment from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce (as part of a coalition

Continue Reading Today’s the Day: Deadline to Submit Comments to the FTC

The FTC announced yesterday that it was extending the deadline to submit public comments on its proposed rule banning employment non-competes.

With the extension, the FTC will now be accepting comments on the proposed rule until April 19. Originally, the deadline for submitting comments was March 20.

Information on how to submit comments can be found in the Federal Register notice.Continue Reading FTC Extends Public Comment Deadline on Proposed Rule Banning Employment Non-Competes Until April 19th

On Wednesday, March 8 at 12 p.m. Pacific, Robert Milligan—Seyfarth partner and co-chair of the firm’s Trade Secrets, Computer Fraud & Non-Competes practice—is presenting the “What Does the FTC’s Crackdown on Non-Competes Mean for Trade Secrets?” webinar for the California Lawyers Association.

The panel will discuss:

  • The FTC’s discussion
  • Continue Reading Robert Milligan to Present Webinar on How Trade Secrets Are Affected by the FTC’s Crackdown on Non-Competes

    On February 16, 2023, the FTC hosted a public forum for the purpose of examining the proposed rule banning non-compete agreements. The agenda included, among other things, opening remarks from Chair Kahn, an overview of the rulemaking process by the FTC’s general counsel, a panel discussion, and comments from the public. A recording of the forum is available here.

    In her preliminary remarks, Chair Kahn claimed that the proposed rule would increase workers’ earnings significantly and non-competes are an unfair method of competition. She claimed that the FTC has deep expertise on non-competes based upon enforcement, analysis, and addressing public comments. During the explanatory session, FTC staff explained that the comment period ends March 20th and encouraged the submission of additional comments. Staff also explained the functional test in the proposed rule and indicated that the ban applies to any agreement that functionally operates as a non-compete, which could be an overly broad non-disclosure agreement or training repayment agreement. FTC staff stated that the proposed rule does not apply to “run of the mill non-disclosures.”Continue Reading FTC Holds Public Forum Examining Proposed Rule to Ban Noncompete Clauses and Business Organizations Sharply Criticize It

    As earlier reported on this blog, Commissioner Christine Wilson, the sole dissenter in the Federal Trade Commission’s proposed rule banning non-competes, announced yesterday that she is resigning from the agency over her fierce opposition to progressive FTC Chair Lina Khan’s methods of advancing her agenda. In a Wall Street Journal OpEd, Commissioner Wilson took aim at Ms. Khan’s “disregard for the rule of law and due process.” She cited several examples of this alleged disregard for the rule of law and due process, including the FTC’s launch of the rulemaking process to ban nearly all non-compete clauses in employee contracts, affecting roughly one-fifth of employment contracts in the US. As Commissioner Wilson noted in her vigorous dissenting statement to the FTC’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (“NPR”), the proposed rule defies the Supreme Court’s decision in West Virginia v. EPA (2022), which held that an agency can’t claim “to discover in a long-extant statute an unheralded power representing a transformative expansion in its regulatory authority.” As Commission Wilson noted in her dissent, and as we have pointed out here and here, the FTC’s NPR purports to undo hundreds of years of state legal precedent—dating from even before the American Revolution—that employs a fact-specific inquiry into whether a non-compete clause is unreasonable in duration and scope, given the business justification for the restriction.Continue Reading “Noisy Exit” of FTC Commissioner Christine Wilson Signals Increasingly Contentious Efforts to Regulate Non-Compete Clauses at Federal Level for Foreseeable Future

    There have been some significant developments since the FTC announced its proposed rule banning non-competes in early January.

    First, the FTC will be hosting a virtual public forum on its proposed rule on February 16th from 12 p.m. to 3 p.m. Eastern.

    The forum is open to the public (see agenda for the forum here). The commission will

    Continue Reading The Non-Compete Crackdown Continues: FTC Hosts Public Forum on Proposed Rule to Ban Non-Competes, Biden Attacks Non-Competes in State of Union Speech, and FTC Commissioner Wilson Resigns