The Boss Man is a Monopolist
The Boss Man is a Monopolist
Minnesotans let the FTC know what they think about noncompetes.
Earlier this year the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), one of the federal government’s key antitrust regulators, proposed a rule banning noncompete clauses. These are restrictive employment contracts that bar workers from leaving a job to work for a competitor.
The use of noncompete clauses has exploded with an estimated 1-in-5 Americans covered by such contracts, including many low-wage workers. The FTC estimates that a nationwide ban on noncompetes will increase wages by over $300 billion. In Minnesota over half a million workers are covered by these anticompetitive clauses.
As part of its rulemaking, the FTC is accepting comments from the public on the proposed ban. A search of comments from Minnesotans revealed some fascinating insights and concerns.
Dr. Brian Johns - In his comments Dr. Johns called noncompetes unamerican and talked about the proliferation of these contracts in major health systems in Minnesota, “making it nearly impossible for physicians and other health care professionals to change employers.” Johns further added, “when all of the contracts you sign contain a non-compete clause, this is by no means voluntary, but compulsory, which subsequently transforms any willful employment into indentured servitude.”
Anonymous Physician - This physician’s comments touched on the loss of independent physicians as they are increasingly bought out by large systems, which then use noncompete clauses to further entrench their monopoly power. “If a physician chooses to leave, and loves the community they live in, they cannot open an independent practice or join any nearby hospital or clinic.”
Anonymous CNP - This nurse practitioner talked about how noncompete agreements have allowed their employer to hold compensation down. They also gave an example of how community health can be negatively impacted by these contracts. “One of the other doctors from our primary care clinics decided not to work for over one year just to satisfy the binding agreement instead of getting another job.”
Jeffrey Hickstein (Small Business Owner) - Hickstein’s comments were supportive of noncompete clauses, arguing a ban would be bad for small businesses. However, he also used this space to go off on monopolists. “The bigger issue at play is the dominance of certain employers in their fields (i.e. Amazon), and government would do well to aggressively enforce the existing anti-trust laws and finally regulate the Tech industry, which is out of control.”
Stuart Raymond (Print Shop Worker) - Raymond expresses regret for signing a noncompete agreement, but also shares that he and his coworkers did not realize they had signed one. “I have been there 8 years now only amassing an extra 3 dollars per hour in pay since my hire. The non compete to me feels like I am trapped.” Raymond also adds he knows of competitors that have refused to hire his coworkers because of concern over the noncompetes they have signed and the litigation that could follow.
Megan Marke (Physician Assistant) - Marke’s comments focus on how rural healthcare monopolists use noncompetes to suppress wages. “Because of this (meaning the lack of hospitals) providers in northern Minnesota are grossly underpaid and forced to work in unfair conditions.”
Zach Pettus - Pettus shares that his wife is subject to a noncompete agreement and it has left her unable to change jobs even after discovering unethical behavior at her current employer. Pettus also highlights that noncompetes are particularly crippling to independent contractors and urges the FTC not “to scale it (the proposed rule change) back or leave any loopholes for businesses to hold people hostage.”
Marc Moisa (chemical scientist) - While Moisa lives in South Carolina, his comments focus on his employer, Minnesota-based H.B. Fuller and its use of noncompetes. His refusal to sign a noncompete has limited his advancement opportunities. “Companies should not be able to hold any employee hostage to bad treatment or poor compensation by threat of a non-compete.”
Jane Jones - She details a "Fair Competition" agreement she was asked to sign as a condition to continuing to receive an annual bonus. “This agreement was non-negotiable. I did not sign it and will have to look for another job if I want to be compensated for my skills and capabilities.”
If you are wondering what you can do, two things. The first would be to join the folks wdetailed above and the many thousands of others around the country in letting the FTC know what you think about it’s proposal. The good folks at the American Economic Liberties Project have put together an easy to use tool if you care to submit comments. The second is to contact your state legislators.
In addition to the FTC’s proposed rule, several bills banning noncompetes have been introduced in St. Paul. This is important even if the FTC’s ban is put in place because the commission only has jurisdiction over for-profit entities, leaving out the many healthcare workers at our non-profit health systems from this protection.
Senator Alice Mann (DFL - Lakeville), a physician, and Representatives Emma Greenman (DFL - Minneapolis) and Steve Elkins (DFL - Bloomington) all have bills that would prohibit noncompetes in various ways. While the FTC’s actions inevitably wind their way through court challenges, hopefully Minnesota will use this session to join the other states that have banned noncompetes and help free workers from the grip of their monopolist bosses.
