Work Reform

10003 readers

44 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

All workers must be paid a living wage for their labor.
Income inequality is the main cause of lower living standards.
Workers must join together and fight back for what is rightfully theirs.
We must not be divided and conquered. Workers gain the most when they focus on unifying issues.

Our Goals

Higher wages for underpaid workers.
Better worker representation, including but not limited to unions.
Better and fewer working hours.
Stimulating a massive wave of worker organizing in the United States and beyond.
Organizing and supporting political causes and campaigns that put workers first.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

seeCseas@lemmy.world

tintory@lemm.ee

TinMod@lemmy.world

120

FTC Non-compete rule published in Federal Register (www.govinfo.gov)

submitted 6 months ago by DemBoSain@midwest.social to c/workreform@lemmy.world

7 comments fedilink hide all child comments

This goes into effect September 4, 2024. Employers with existing non-compete agreements must post the notice on page 163 (38504). After that date you may accept a job offer from anybody, including a direct competitor, and not worry about violating any non-compete agreement.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] TrueStoryBob@lemmy.world 15 points 6 months ago (3 children)

Whoa. This is freaking huge in the media/entertainment industry.

[–] DemBoSain@midwest.social 11 points 6 months ago (1 children)

The company I work for lost a MAJOR customer last fall. Management panicked, and rushed everyone to sign a non-compete agreement. Only after getting all the agreements signed did they let everyone know what had happened, and that there would be massive layoffs.

Fucking psychos had just gone through a huge hiring phase. Some new employees had only been there a matter of months before finding out they would lose their job, and wouldn't be able to get a new one in the same industry unless they waited two years.

[–] fubbernuckin@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

At that point i would simply ignore the agreement and see if they try to sue me.

[–] DemBoSain@midwest.social 2 points 6 months ago

I've already had this argument with people I work with. It doesn't matter if a non-compete is enforceable or not. They're meant to demoralize and demotivate employees so they stay with the company at low pay. Someone that has just lost their job isn't going to risk a potentially life-destroying lawsuit.

I know they would sue, because the process is the goal, and they have deeper pockets than I do.

[–] ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 6 months ago

A ton of industries well beyond that. Hell, my propane company I worked for even had non competes.

[–] ruckblack@sh.itjust.works 4 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Also pretty huge in tech. Some of the big firms make you sign some nasty non-competes

[–] BaldProphet@kbin.social 1 points 6 months ago

Now there is one fewer reason to work in California if you're in the tech industry.