Comment on U.S. bans noncompete agreements for nearly all jobs
thantik@lemmy.world 5 months ago
Our supreme court is packed with corporate lackeys. As much as I love this, it’ll be overturned. It is a move in the right direction - you should not be allowed to take away someone’s right to move jobs.
GladiusB@lemmy.world 5 months ago
It’s been issued by the FTC. I’m not sure if the courts are the mechanism to challenge this. Maybe in implementation. But not so much in overturning the policy.
catloaf@lemm.ee 5 months ago
It is the mechanism. They’re already using: news.bloomberglaw.com/…/chamber-of-commerce-sues-…
GladiusB@lemmy.world 5 months ago
It looks like they are suing them. Let’s hope they take as long as they take with Trump. I am also not sure if suing them makes them financially liable or removes the stature? The article doesn’t say much other than lobbyists (fuckin waste of space) are suing the FTC.
ryathal@sh.itjust.works 5 months ago
A challenge to the FTC rule would ultimately lead to a potential Supreme Court case. The court is currently deciding on a case that could render render this decision moot before it ever gets that far.
GladiusB@lemmy.world 5 months ago
Yes. It’s an appeal. However it’s still on the company to provide just cause for it to be removed. The way I am reading the mechanism it still favors the workers unless the company can provide just cause. It seems a NDA is more fitting in almost all cases.
beardown@lemm.ee 5 months ago
It is the appropriate mechanism. It’s administrative law, and is subject to judicial review of the agency’s conformity with lawful rule making
www.law.cornell.edu/wex/chevron_deference
And SCOTUS is going to kill chevron deference later this year, which will largely destroy the administrative state and ability for federal agencies to promulgate and enforce regulations