The FTC has a proposed rule making that would ban noncompetes. This is interesting as bankers, particularly senior ones may see Garden Leave become a thing of the past, but I wonder if they’ll now go to something like a nonsolicit instead. I think it’s also problematic if a seller can now go and directly compete after selling their business.
Trending Content - Investment Banking Forum
| +439 | Female bankers doing brand deals on TikTok | 119 | 3h |
| +142 | UBS rolling out Enhanced Clean Desk Policy, bans deal toys | 16 | 3d |
| +100 | Starting FT in a city 3 hours away, dad has progressing Parkinson's. Looking for advice. | 8 | 1d |
| +73 | JULY 2026 CHICAGO BANK RANKINGS | 29 | 1h |
| +64 | Restructuring is paradise (a completely unbiased account) | 6 | 4d |
| +37 | Not Treated Well by Other Interns | 20 | 1d |
| +36 | Handling frustration | 5 | 4d |
| +35 | Taking days off as an intern | 17 | 3h |
| +28 | Thoughts on Intrepid - Houlihan Merger | 10 | 3d |
| +27 | IB TikTok Influencers (wehave2wizards) | 9 | 3d |
Career Resources
I don't see a problem with Non-competes if you are being compensated for the time that you are not allowed to "compete". However, I think at the junior level they are overkill.
I think it’s more of an issue for M&A. How do you prevent the former CEO from going and opening up if you can’t enforce a noncompete?
I think they are ridiculous especially in medicine where I’ve seen 30 miles from “any owned facility”, if it’s a large health system that may be massive and the only way out is mid five to six figure litigation cost to find out if it’s overly restrictive. In banking a non-solicit to existing clients may be more appropriate.
I still think the correct answer is properly adjusted compensation. Whether that is achieved through earnouts, some sort of retainer, retaining management, etc. The way I see it if you keep a CEO busy and well compensated, then they will not go start competing practices.
First of all, the proposal is to ban non-compete for employees so it wouldn't apply to business sellers and buyers would still have the option to compel sellers to sign a non-compete.
A gardening leave is not a non-compete, but an obligation to give a longer notice period. While it's customary for the employee to stop perfomrning their duties during the leave, technically the company can require you to work throughout your leave (it happened to a friend of mine who had made lots of travel plan, he wasn't happy...). Now we can all agree that a long notice period / gardening leave does reduce your attractiveness to a new employer, but my quick read of the link suggest gardening leaves would still be acceptable under the proposal rules changes.
Vel qui doloribus sequi reiciendis eaque. Nobis ut voluptatibus voluptatem. Qui omnis qui beatae voluptatem.
Aut repudiandae quia dolorem aspernatur nostrum ratione. Nihil debitis esse eos architecto est dolorem odit. Aut ut exercitationem reprehenderit nisi voluptas. Modi iste sit rerum ea voluptatibus ipsum.
Vel blanditiis consequatur quis vero iste dolor voluptatum odio. Omnis molestiae quia porro. Autem sint dolores maiores vitae unde architecto. Nisi fuga maiores laudantium et soluta eius molestias. Aut doloribus exercitationem eveniet reiciendis officia facere odit molestiae.
Dignissimos at autem minima veritatis soluta cumque. Minus nesciunt eum quasi corrupti a facere. Nisi odit et dolor dolore. Laborum illo autem sapiente deserunt eaque dolorem. Excepturi ducimus nihil magni aut et animi.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...