this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2024
1058 points (99.4% liked)

News

23296 readers
4901 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
 

The Federal Trade Commission narrowly voted Tuesday to ban nearly all noncompetes, employment agreements that typically prevent workers from joining competing businesses or launching ones of their own.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 61 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (4 children)

This sounds awesome, but I will say that I'm a bit concerned about whether or not the Supreme Court will let this stand. I'm speculating that the Supreme Court may strike it down and say that the FTC doesn't have jurisdiction and that non-compete clauses should be handled by the Department of Labor or something like that. Imo it could fall under either department because the FTC is meant to tackle anti-trust measures, and non-compete clauses could be seen as a form of monopolistic behavior (restricting competition).

At the same time, however, non-competes have to do with labor practices, which is why I could see the Supreme Court saying that it's something the DoL should enforce, and because (afaik at least) the DoL only has the power to enforce legislative regulation, we'd end up back where we started: waiting for Congress to get their shit together and actually do something instead of sitting around and picking fights or virtue signalling.

I hope I'm wrong though. I'd like it if our Supreme Court would let us have nice things every now and then.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 6 months ago (2 children)

What you are talking about is colloquially called Chevron Deference. And yes, it is on the kill list after Roe, Obergefell, and I can only assume Brown v Board ffs.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Not after, before (well maybe after Roe since that's already gone).

Chevron deference is already on the chopping block, and very well might be gone by the end of the current SCOTUS term. And nobody seems to know or care.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago

I wonder if they might hesitate on it. Getting rid of Chevron Deference cuts both ways. Conservative justices can shoot down agency decisions, but so can liberal justices. It only makes sense for conservatives to do it if they think they can control the justice system at every level indefinitely.

They might have been feeling that way under Trump, but they might not be feeling that way anymore, and definitely won't if Trump misses reelection.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 months ago

We are all Dred Scott on this fine day

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 months ago (1 children)

If only they could ban the Supreme Court... ;)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

Or at least create SCOTUS terms, maybe. Does that do anything? Who could know such things. We need to do something though. The conservative justices aren't legal activists, they are legal evangelicals.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Wouldn't Department of Labour ban ALL of them instead "almost all"?

EDIT: Really? Why downvote? Wouldn't any sane Anything of Labour ban noncompetes when court explicitly says it is their jurysdiction?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

The one's that aren't banned are for senior executives. Which is the one place where non-competes make sense. It's not anything that really matters.

This is covered in the article, which is probably why you're getting downvoted.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

It would come down to exactly what authority has been granted to the FTC by Congress and whether or not this falls under that. And not a broad strokes description, but just what power Congress actually delegated to them and no further. The recent EPA cases are examples of that in action.