Maybe don’t get a drink with your competitor. These are not easy times to be in human resources. Attracting, recruiting, and retaining talented employees is as challenging as ever. As I have previously written, wages are...more
Introduction - No-poach agreements, wherein companies agree not to solicit or hire employees away from a competitor, have been targeted by the White House, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Antitrust Division....more
In Deslandes v. McDonald’s USA LLC, issued August 25, 2023, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit overturned the dismissal of antitrust claims that challenged no-poach clauses in franchise agreements....more
An important federal appeals court has clarified a key principle of antitrust law in a way that potentially makes it more difficult for an employer to win a motion to dismiss, and thereby avoid expensive discovery, with...more
In June 2021, the Supreme Court reaffirmed in NCAA v. Alston that antitrust claims under Section 1 of the Sherman Act “presumptively” call for rule-of-reason analysis and that only the rare case merits “quick look” or per se...more
For the past few years, it seems franchisors have been riding a roller coaster when it comes to no-poach clauses in their franchise agreements. While for a time it seemed as though scrutiny for such clauses might be fading,...more
In an important decision on August 19, 2021, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Aya Healthcare Services, Inc. v. AMN Healthcare, Inc. affirmed the grant of summary judgment in favor of AMN, finding that the...more
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court recently decided an issue of first impression regarding “no-hire” (or “no-poach”) provisions in commercial contracts between two companies. In such agreements, one company agrees not to solicit...more
Federal district courts around the country continue to grapple with how to analyze “no-poach” agreements — whereby two or more companies agree not to hire or recruit each other’s workers — under the antitrust laws. Beginning...more
‘No-poach’ agreements between businesses not to compete with each other for employees have long been held unlawful under Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act, which prohibits certain restraints on trade and competition....more
Legal battles over the antitrust treatment of no-poach agreements continue to escalate with new district court decisions and new pronouncements from two “titans” of antitrust policy, the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the...more
• The Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) have indicated in the past that they believe that certain agreements between employers not to poach each other’s employees are...more
On Thursday, March 7, the Antitrust Division intervened in three antitrust class actions to urge the court that no-poach agreements between vertically related firms, such as between franchisor and franchisee, should be...more
Evolving antitrust treatment of so-called “no-poach” agreements continues to offer important guidance for company counsel and human resources professionals. Over the past two years, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has...more
Attorneys general in ten states and the District of Columbia have recently launched an investigation into the employment practices of eight fast-food franchises. The group sent a joint letter to the companies requesting...more
Fifteen months after the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced its intention to criminally pursue no-poaching agreements — in which competitors agree not to recruit or hire each other’s employees —...more