On Friday, President Joe Biden unveiled an executive order which makes recommendations to the FTC which are intended to increase competition. Among these recommendations was a suggestion to ban or limit non-compete agreements. If non-competes were entirely banned (which they almost certainly won't be), it would be one of the worst economic policy failures in recent times. All sorts of situations in M&A and asset management where trade secrets are highly important and need to be safeguarded. With that being said, I would likely support limitations on non-competes where M&A and trade secrets are not concerned. Just wanted to get the Oasis' thoughts.
Trending Content - Off Topic Forum
Career Resources
My dad got a non-compete agreement when he was fired but they paid three years of salary.
Non competes are such fucking bulshit and shouldn’t be enforceable at all. Trading firms especially abuse them and can be >1 year.
firms use them to prevent people from leaving for a higher salary and that’s it
My post was particularly directed toward non-competes in an M&A context. I agree with you as it relates to workers without any change in ownership. But imagine you’re a buyer of a $5MM business in an industry where a seller can easily start up the same thing again. What is there to protect you in such a situation if not a non-compete? If you take away non-competes, a lot of deals simply won’t happen, leaving sellers with less liquidity and the markets less efficient overall.
20% of all US workers have non-competes signed, including people making sandwiches at Jimi johns and warehouse workers. this isn’t about someone selling their business and starting a second company
Similique magni possimus amet ratione voluptatem est. Aut et dolorum culpa voluptates.
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...