The dust is still settling after the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued its long anticipated final Rule on Tuesday, April 23 banning most non-compete agreements in the employment context. Although the effectiveness of the Rule is likely to be delayed, potentially for years, by court challenges, employers are understandably jittery about their existing non-compete agreements and other restrictive covenants.  Here with answers to some of the most commonly asked questions are Porter Wright employment attorneys Jennifer Huelskamp and Nicole MayoContinue Reading Answers to common questions about the FTC’s non-compete ban: What’s next?

The legal and mainstream media is still abuzz following the Federal Trade Commission’s Jan. 5, 2023, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that would ban all employee non-compete agreements nationwide. And earlier this month, a bipartisan Senate bill was introduced (the Workforce Mobility Act of 2023, sponsored by U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Todd Young (R-Ind.)) that also would ban non-competes across the board (except, as in the FTC’s proposal, in connection with the sale of a business). But comments made by President Biden in his Feb. 7 State of the Union Address signal that a more measured approach focused on banning non-competes for low-wage workers may ultimately be what becomes law.Continue Reading Biden State of the Union signals measured approach on non-compete ban

On Jan. 5, 2023, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced a slate of proposed rulemaking. Of interest to employers in particular is a proposed rule that would completely ban the use of non-competition or non-compete agreements, which prevent employees from working for a competitor or starting a competing business. Typically, these agreements often last months or years and are limited to a certain geographic scope. The FTC noted that it believes non-compete agreements often have the effect of lowering workers’ wages.Continue Reading FTC announces proposed rule prohibiting non-compete agreements

Two recent decisions – one from the federal district court in New Jersey and one from a federal Administrative Law Judge – potentially will have significant impact on the Federal Trade Commission’s (“FTC”) enforcement of business’s data security obligations.

FTC v. Wyndam Worldwide

In FTC v. Wyndham Worldwide Corporation, the New Jersey federal district