for a burger flipper? that's crazy. What even is the non compete for? other fast food places? does that include all restaurants? a non compete for a minimum wage job is wild.
I did some more reading and it only applies to other burger king places for 6 months. I still think it's bullshit though, stopping people from leaving a job for a better location is just wrong. If you dont want your workers to get poached, maybe dont treat them like animals.
Which honestly im fine with. Execs making 150k+ probably already have a cushy job and could feasibly retire fairly soon. I mean I wish it would've applies to those jobs too, because non competes are bullshit in general, but of all the jobs im worried about, $150k+ execs are *really* low on the list.
Why are we allowing an unelected agency to make up rules outside Congress’ vote? These regulations are not Constitutional. A regulatory body should not be allowed to make up rules like this.
It's called Administrative Law. The Agencies are empowered by Acts of Congress. There is too much minutiae for Congress to vote on everything, hence the necessity of the agencies like the FTC, FDA, BATF, SEC Congress doesn't have the time nor the EXPERTISE to make informed decisions.
@@allste626 You've probably punched a clock your entire life. I'm a retired Air Force enlisted man so I know all about being taken advantage of. The processes each company has developed and the patents they own does not need to be shared with any other company. Lockheed values those processes, ideas and patents just like I do and they could not survive without a non-compete clause in their employment contracts.
@@johnrhansonsr Bold of you to make such wild assumptions. I'm also retired. What I did has no relevance on this conversation but I will tell you I was an engineer for over 35 years; and I have actually worked with non-competes before. They are awful. They depress wages, restrict switching employers/starting their own businesses and often cause inequities within the company. Also, if you want to illicit sympathy... don't bring up the military industrial complex; you aren't going to win anyone over trying to white knight for Lockheed Martin, who is also well known for mistreating employees. Anyway, enjoy this new age of no non-competes! I know myself and many others are glad this has changed and you are in the vast minority with your opinion; and quite frankly, it's really weird that you're more worried about corporations than people. Please give my condolences to anyone that deals with you in real life.
@@johnrhansonsr Also, Lockheed Martin can and will survive without a non-compete clause. You're extremely silly if you think they are going to close up shop after this non compete ban takes effect.
This is the best thing that could have ever happened. If an employer wants to keep his employees, maybe he should compensate them properly. Treat them properly and they would not need to look for another position. I assure you if you're a rich or you own your own business. I one million percent. Assure you your employee does not want a job. Huh there's no job security. It's harder to buy a vehicle or a home because length of employment. It's not as long we don't want to look for a new job. We just wanna be taken care of not greedy but properly. And we sure as hell wanna be spoken to. In a correct manner and not taking advantage of if you do that, this shouldn't, where are you at all? Secondly, this is America if I leave one business I should be able to go open 1 up as long as I don't use every little bit of information that you use to start your business. Why should I not be able to start my business think of the comparison? Should the New York Yankees have been sued because they copied the New York Mets and created another baseball team. Come the f*** on let's be realistic people, there should be no non-compete unless the person. Is truly making a ridiculous amount of money, end? Or they have trade secrets that could affect the business and they use them. Not just have the knowledge, but use it for steel and do corporate espionage. But there's already a law against that, so that's not a non. Compete, that's corporate espionage.
I'm waiting to see the unintended consequences. All too often things like this backfire and hurt the very people they claim to protect. Let's hope that isn't true.
I think it’d be a tough one to spin negatively. Employers are just so in the wrong with trying to prevent their employees from working for competitors.
I think my concern is that there are more and more incentives for *employers to fire people based solely on numbers. Sure, that's been true for a while, but now, especially with work from home and workers constantly moving jobs, seems like there is less reason for employers to invest in people. Everyone gets the same training, the same big corporate "welcome to the team", and gets the same "market leading" employee benefits. Unions negotiate for you, but they don't listen to you. Corporations will continue to hire unqualified people just to fire them and hire someone new because it's too expensive to retrain. Workers see employers as no less expendable than corporations see people. Non compete agreements are most certainly abused and need legislative revision, but should the employee really be able to go and get trained by a local small company, just to turn around and get the big bucks in corporate? Edit: spelling correction.
The fact that even accepting that offer would make you constantly under supervision in the company you accepted for... Nobody wants a CEO that can sink the company for a little extra cash
Ppl won't remember who's authority it was to do what. Ppl will remember which orgs finally got off their ass and did something, From common sense regs in the EU like USB-C standards to the FTC saying you can't own people after you stop paying them, it's making the outfits that made the call far too popular to shout down.
I'm kind of iffy on this one. There are jobs where an employee will have confidential information about methods, procedures, and/or build information that a competitor would love to get their hands on. The former employer can file against the new company claiming that its using stolen information (corporate espionage) but its much hard to prove. What's the difference between IP theft and poaching employees with IP information?
several things are going to happen, The price of food which has already almost doubled in 3 years will double again, employers are going to lay off half the workers and the other half will get hours cut and install digital ordering systems
@@robertbernard651how is this related lolx… non compete essentially only profit corporate that have the money to sue people. empowering fellow citizens is always a good thing. we r not living in china with no workers right or human right
Companies should not have the power to hold workers hostage and threaten them for trying to work at a lace that's better for the worker. Companies that do that should fail and close down. Workers should and need to stand up for their right. We need everyone to help unions comeback to help the average worker out. It's win win. Don't forget corporations got to where they are from exploiting the workforce for decades. Stand up and fight brothers and sisters
Medical personnel are still FORCED to take the shot too. Another mandated decision for that specific group. That's why No one is going to school for this any longer
They had to, Burger Kings were making burger flippers sign non competes.
Jimmy John's did exactly that to their employees
for a burger flipper? that's crazy. What even is the non compete for? other fast food places? does that include all restaurants? a non compete for a minimum wage job is wild.
I did some more reading and it only applies to other burger king places for 6 months. I still think it's bullshit though, stopping people from leaving a job for a better location is just wrong. If you dont want your workers to get poached, maybe dont treat them like animals.
They haven't completely banned it, they just raised the salary threshold.
Are you deaf and blind?
No, it also specifies the position too. Regular employees earning 150k is also covered by this.
Which honestly im fine with. Execs making 150k+ probably already have a cushy job and could feasibly retire fairly soon. I mean I wish it would've applies to those jobs too, because non competes are bullshit in general, but of all the jobs im worried about, $150k+ execs are *really* low on the list.
Execs make a lot more than 150k, but that does mean most devs or engineers can enforce non completes
We love when the government protects workers
We do, people like these two sharletons who've never worked a real job dont
My husband was told they weren’t easy to enforce after his residency. He was not required to sign one when he joined a group of surgeons.
It feels like the first time in my entire life that the FTC has changed a rule to the beenfit of workers. Kinda historic, ngl.
Why are we allowing an unelected agency to make up rules outside Congress’ vote?
These regulations are not Constitutional. A regulatory body should not be allowed to make up rules like this.
It's called Administrative Law. The Agencies are empowered by Acts of Congress. There is too much minutiae for Congress to vote on everything, hence the necessity of the agencies like the FTC, FDA, BATF, SEC
Congress doesn't have the time nor the EXPERTISE to make informed decisions.
Was already this way. People just didnt fight when told the agreements were enforceable
As a former owner of companies, this is a terrible ruling.
Nothing terrible about it. You just like taking advantage of people.
@@allste626 You've probably punched a clock your entire life. I'm a retired Air Force enlisted man so I know all about being taken advantage of. The processes each company has developed and the patents they own does not need to be shared with any other company. Lockheed values those processes, ideas and patents just like I do and they could not survive without a non-compete clause in their employment contracts.
@@johnrhansonsr Bold of you to make such wild assumptions. I'm also retired. What I did has no relevance on this conversation but I will tell you I was an engineer for over 35 years; and I have actually worked with non-competes before. They are awful. They depress wages, restrict switching employers/starting their own businesses and often cause inequities within the company.
Also, if you want to illicit sympathy... don't bring up the military industrial complex; you aren't going to win anyone over trying to white knight for Lockheed Martin, who is also well known for mistreating employees.
Anyway, enjoy this new age of no non-competes! I know myself and many others are glad this has changed and you are in the vast minority with your opinion; and quite frankly, it's really weird that you're more worried about corporations than people. Please give my condolences to anyone that deals with you in real life.
@@johnrhansonsr Also, Lockheed Martin can and will survive without a non-compete clause. You're extremely silly if you think they are going to close up shop after this non compete ban takes effect.
@@johnrhansonsr Maybe spend your free time doing something productive; the internet isn't for you, I think.
Had to rewatch, but damn why were these allowed in the first place?
Because America is a young country with very old people running it.
So you can't take existing customers to a new company. So basically you can't be employed then poach.
It's big in software because you don't want employees stealing code and taking it straight to competitors.
You can't do that regardless@williamdimanto4996 that is what ndas are for and client info as well as damaging the business isn't allowed
@@keyser456that is what ndas are for
This is the best thing that could have ever happened. If an employer wants to keep his employees, maybe he should compensate them properly. Treat them properly and they would not need to look for another position. I assure you if you're a rich or you own your own business. I one million percent. Assure you your employee does not want a job. Huh there's no job security. It's harder to buy a vehicle or a home because length of employment. It's not as long we don't want to look for a new job. We just wanna be taken care of not greedy but properly. And we sure as hell wanna be spoken to. In a correct manner and not taking advantage of if you do that, this shouldn't, where are you at all? Secondly, this is America if I leave one business I should be able to go open 1 up as long as I don't use every little bit of information that you use to start your business. Why should I not be able to start my business think of the comparison? Should the New York Yankees have been sued because they copied the New York Mets and created another baseball team. Come the f*** on let's be realistic people, there should be no non-compete unless the person. Is truly making a ridiculous amount of money, end? Or they have trade secrets that could affect the business and they use them. Not just have the knowledge, but use it for steel and do corporate espionage. But there's already a law against that, so that's not a non. Compete, that's corporate espionage.
Wouldn't it be great if politicians and high end public servants had no conflict of interest laws for when they leave office.
I'm waiting to see the unintended consequences. All too often things like this backfire and hurt the very people they claim to protect. Let's hope that isn't true.
I think it’d be a tough one to spin negatively. Employers are just so in the wrong with trying to prevent their employees from working for competitors.
I think my concern is that there are more and more incentives for *employers to fire people based solely on numbers. Sure, that's been true for a while, but now, especially with work from home and workers constantly moving jobs, seems like there is less reason for employers to invest in people. Everyone gets the same training, the same big corporate "welcome to the team", and gets the same "market leading" employee benefits. Unions negotiate for you, but they don't listen to you. Corporations will continue to hire unqualified people just to fire them and hire someone new because it's too expensive to retrain. Workers see employers as no less expendable than corporations see people. Non compete agreements are most certainly abused and need legislative revision, but should the employee really be able to go and get trained by a local small company, just to turn around and get the big bucks in corporate?
Edit: spelling correction.
@@zahjav That's an excellent point, and well put.
We are not a nation of rules, the FTC doesn't make legislation. I'm fine with the banning of non-compete agreements, I'm not fine with rules not laws.
I donno. What's stopping a competing company from offering another ceo to sink the company and get a position?
The fact that even accepting that offer would make you constantly under supervision in the company you accepted for... Nobody wants a CEO that can sink the company for a little extra cash
those things were never really enforceable for rank and file employees anyway.
Companies will just have more strict NDAs that way even if a worker leaves that worker will not be able to give away competetor secrets or strategies
Ppl won't remember who's authority it was to do what. Ppl will remember which orgs finally got off their ass and did something, From common sense regs in the EU like USB-C standards to the FTC saying you can't own people after you stop paying them, it's making the outfits that made the call far too popular to shout down.
I'm kind of iffy on this one. There are jobs where an employee will have confidential information about methods, procedures, and/or build information that a competitor would love to get their hands on. The former employer can file against the new company claiming that its using stolen information (corporate espionage) but its much hard to prove.
What's the difference between IP theft and poaching employees with IP information?
The salary threshold will be moot in 15 years
The threshold is far too low. Even i can make 150k as an tradesman .
This proves that the economy is tanking and fast ...
But you still can't work at both places at once though
Way overdue. Attorney's are sad.
Non-competes should be unlawful.
About time
So you train someone, then they open a business in competition with you. Why would I train this person, then?
this is a good thing. why do u sound like it is a bad policy?
several things are going to happen, The price of food which has already almost doubled in 3 years will double again, employers are going to lay off half the workers and the other half will get hours cut and install digital ordering systems
@@robertbernard651how is this related lolx… non compete essentially only profit corporate that have the money to sue people. empowering fellow citizens is always a good thing. we r not living in china with no workers right or human right
Companies should not have the power to hold workers hostage and threaten them for trying to work at a lace that's better for the worker. Companies that do that should fail and close down. Workers should and need to stand up for their right. We need everyone to help unions comeback to help the average worker out. It's win win. Don't forget corporations got to where they are from exploiting the workforce for decades. Stand up and fight brothers and sisters
Poor doctors
Medical personnel are still FORCED to take the shot too. Another mandated decision for that specific group. That's why No one is going to school for this any longer
Terrible idea... crooked as hell people at the top
Why is it a bad idea, genuinely wanting to know