this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2024
419 points (98.8% liked)

News

23287 readers
4064 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 27 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TragicNotCute@lemmy.world 102 points 6 months ago (1 children)

This seems pretty big. Bans non-compete agreements and requires employers to tell employees that they are now void. Hot damn

[–] RaoulDook@lemmy.world 23 points 6 months ago

Good news. Seems like a no-brainer if you consider the Freedom of Association component of our 1st Amendment rights in the USA anyway.

[–] dogslayeggs@lemmy.world 63 points 6 months ago (2 children)

My fiance had to move to an entirely different city in order to leave the horrible hospital she worked at but still stay in her profession because of a non-compete clause. They should have been determined unconstitutional decades ago.

She met me when she moved to the new city, so it worked out for me I guess. Less so for her!

[–] CaptainPedantic@lemmy.world 16 points 6 months ago (3 children)

While I disagree entirely with the concept of a non-compete, I can sort of understand the logic for employees who work with trade secrets and intellectual property. The only logic behind a non-compete for a hospital or any other service industry business is "fuck you".

I'm glad it kinda worked out for you tho.

[–] SmoothLiquidation@lemmy.world 18 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Part of the reason that Silicon Valley became so big instead of some place like Boston on the east coast is that California has always banned non compete clauses for workers. This allowed for more cross talk for the workers in the area and everyone was better for it.

[–] phoneymouse@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago

California only banned this in the past few years.

[–] timbuck2themoon@sh.itjust.works 9 points 6 months ago

Stealing IP has always been, and will remain, illegal though. Non competes in general were always solely for businesses and detrimental to workers.

[–] oce@jlai.lu 8 points 6 months ago

I can sort of understand the logic for employees who work with trade secrets and intellectual property.

Aren't NDAs made for that?

[–] grue@lemmy.world 14 points 6 months ago

She met me when she moved to the new city, so it worked out for me I guess. Less so for her!

Do we have a !suicidebywords community somewhere yet?

[–] alilbee@lemmy.world 49 points 6 months ago

This is huge! This will increase wages for both the lower and middle class, make both employees and most employers happy, and I love the provision about not being able to make it even appear that your employees are under a non-compete. Eager to see how it survives the inevitable legal onslaught from the bigger corps, but regardless this FTC has been stellar.

[–] KamikazeRusher@lemm.ee 33 points 6 months ago

And the Chamber of Commerce is undoubtedly going to sue in court this week to have it overturned while telling us that it’s actually pro-employee to not be able to work elsewhere because of overreaching NCAs.

Oh wait…

[–] Corigan@lemm.ee 30 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Now do forced arbitration clauses?

[–] grue@lemmy.world 20 points 6 months ago
  1. Ban forced arbitration/waiver of right to class-action

  2. Enforce anti-trust law

  3. Enforce the UCC/doctrine of First Sale (i.e., recognize that EULAs are invalid bunk)

[–] tearsintherain@leminal.space 27 points 6 months ago (1 children)

FTC working for the people, rather than using their position to audition for lucrative future private gigs. Rock on.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 5 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

I mean, in fairness, non-competes fuck up other businesses, too. They're also sort of a pain to litigate, generally speaking. So bigger firms hiring people from smaller firms do see a benefit by simply clearing the deck of annoying trivial NCs.

Less of a "working for the people" and more "performance tuning the engine of market capitalism". Which is still more than I've seen from most federal agencies in a good year. So, polite golf clap

[–] tearsintherain@leminal.space 7 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

This is the same FTC that challenged further supermarket consolidation. Same FTC that is challenging big tech and is wanting AI regulation. Same FTC that Apple stopped John Stewart from interviewing. Clearly this FTC bothers enough giants. https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/04/apple-wouldnt-let-jon-stewart-interview-ftc-chair-lina-khan-tv-host-claims/

"The U.S. Chamber of Commerce vowed to sue the F.T.C. to block the proposal, calling it "an unlawful power grab" in a statement shortly after the vote."

This FTC deserves solid applause because this action is huge.

[–] Kalothar@lemmy.ca 23 points 6 months ago

This is great, they were only a way into strong arming employee retention by making them fill locked in to the company

[–] scroll_responsibly@lemmy.sdf.org 18 points 6 months ago (1 children)
[–] aniki@lemm.ee 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)
[–] scroll_responsibly@lemmy.sdf.org 6 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Not a robot (or at least I don’t think I am😅)

[–] TommySoda@lemmy.world 7 points 6 months ago
[–] gibmiser@lemmy.world 7 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Woah, is this fucking for real? Is it for all sectors? Don't have time to read right now but this sounds like a big deal

[–] catloaf@lemm.ee 16 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Everyone except existing noncompetes for senior executives.

The commission's final rule does not nullify existing noncompetes with senior executives, who are defined as those earning more than $151,164 a year and who hold a policy-making position.

[–] gibmiser@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

Sounds... reasonable. Well I'll be damned. That's awesome

[–] Cadeillac@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

I am really curious as to how/if this applies to professional wrestling. I always hear lots of the wrestlers are independent contractors, but also that they have noncompetes

[–] Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago

Paywall pass

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 0 points 6 months ago

Noooo! But muh freedom to contract, tho! Take'n 'way muh civil liberteas!