The Federal Trade Commission has (almost)
killed the non-compete.[1] In a 3-2 vote on April 23,
2024, the FTC issued its long-anticipated Non-Compete Clause Rule (the “Non-Compete
Ban”). The Non-Compete Ban provides that it is an unfair method of
competition—and therefore a violation of section 5 of the Federal Trade
Commission Act—for employers to enter into non-compete clauses with workers on
or after the Non-Compete Ban’s effective date.[2] The effective date is to
occur 120 days after the Non-Compete Ban’s publication in the Federal Register.[3]
Technically the Non-Compete Ban does not
apply to every worker – senior executives are exempted but, for workers who are
not senior executives, existing non-competes will no longer be enforceable
after the Non-Compete Ban’s effective date.[4] Under the Non-Compete Ban,
a “non-compete clause” is defined as a term or condition of employment that
prohibits a worker from, penalizes a worker for, or functions to prevent a
worker from: (1) seeking or accepting work in the United States with a
different person where such work would begin after the conclusion of the
employment that includes the term or condition; or (2) operating a business in
the United States after the conclusion of the employment that includes the term
or condition.[5]
Beyond banning non-competes, the FTC is also compelling employers to provide notice
to workers with existing non-competes notice that their non-competes are no
longer enforceable.[6]
In an effort to facilitate compliance and minimize burden, the Non-Compete Ban
includes model language that satisfies this notice requirement.[7]
While the Non-Compete Ban
effectively eliminates non-compete clauses, there are some notable exceptions
and inapplicable situations to be aware of. With respect to existing
non-competes, i.e., non-competes entered into before the Non-Compete Ban’s
effective date, the FTC adopts a different approach for senior executives than
for other workers.[8]
The Non-Compete Ban exempts “senior executives,” defined as workers earning
more than $151,164 who are in a “policy-making position.”[9] The FTC reasoned that the Non-Compete
Ban permits existing non-competes with senior executives to remain in force
because such a subset of workers is less likely to be subject to the kind of
acute, ongoing harms currently being suffered by other workers subject to
existing non-competes and because commenters raised credible concerns about the
practical impacts of extinguishing existing non-competes for senior executives.[10] It is estimated that
senior executives represent less than 0.75% of the current workforce, so this
exception is exceedingly narrow.[11]
In addition to senior executives, the Non-Compete
Ban does not apply to non-competes entered into by a person pursuant to a bona
fide sale of a business entity.[12] Further, the Non-Compete
Ban does not apply where a cause of action related to a non-compete accrued
prior to the effective date.[13] The Non-Compete Ban also
provides that it is not an unfair method of competition to enforce or attempt
to enforce a non-compete or to make representations about a non-compete where a
person has a good-faith basis to believe that the Non-Compete Ban is
inapplicable.[14]
Unsurprisingly, the reaction to the
Non-Compete Ban has supporters and detractors. While many workers see this as a
win, detractors argue it could lead to businesses being less willing to hire in
fields that involve sensitive business information such as factors, importers,
or financial institutions. It could also extinguish the practice of businesses
paying for employees’ advanced education in exchange for limitations on them
leaving the business. Additionally, it could result in lower wages now that
businesses have less guarantee that the worker will not leave (it could also
result in the opposite, as businesses increase wages to stop workers from
leaving or to qualify them as senior executives).
Regardless, the Non-Compete Ban will be
challenged in courts before it becomes effective. This will likely take the
form of direct Administrative Procedures Act challenges (with a strong Contract
Clause angle given the government’s interference with currently existing
contracts), although it could also be used as an affirmative defense by workers
who are being sued for violating non-competes. And, even if the Non-Compete Ban
is ruled legal, and not overturned by a new administration, there will be
endless litigation over whether an employee qualifies as a “senior executive.”
If you believe you or your business may be impacted by the Non-Compete Ban or if you are interested in challenging the Non-Compete Ban, please contact the experienced Employment and Business Law attorneys at Eckland & Blando today to understand your rights and obligations.
[1] Research and drafting assistance provided
by Rebecca Favre, law clerk at Eckland & Blando.
[2] 16 CFR Part 910.
[3] Id.
[4] § 910.2(a)(1)(ii).
[5] § 910.1(1).
[6] § 910.2(b)(1).
[7] § 910.2(b)(4).
[8] 16 CFR Part 910.
[9] § 910.1(2).
[10] Id.
[11] FTC Announces Rule Banning
Noncompetes, The Federal Trade Commission,
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2024/04/ftc-announces-rule-banning-noncompetes.
[12] § 910.3(a).
[13] § 910.3(b).
[14] § 910.3(c).