The commission’s decision represents an effective end to what some described as an ambitious, if not complicated, rulemaking effort. Federal judges in Texas and Florida issued injunctions on the noncompete ban, while a Pennsylvania judge allowed it to proceed over an employer’s challenge.
FTC’s noncompete ban never took effect. But it would have prohibited enforcement of most noncompete agreements nationwide, save for contracts involving a narrow class of “senior executives.” At the time, the agency’s Democratic majority said the rule was necessary due to the limits such agreements placed on workers’ ability to compete for better jobs or start their own businesses.
Judges who struck down the ban said it exceeded the agency’s authority. Ferguson agreed in his statement Friday, adding that some noncompete agreements are unlawful under U.S. antitrust laws.
“As I have said, noncompete agreements can be pernicious,” Ferguson said. “They can be, and sometimes are, abused to the effect of severely inhibiting workers’ ability to make a living ... And that is why Congress, through the FTC Act and the Sherman Act, gave us the authority to step in when they are onerous enough to become unlawful. The Commission should have been doing everything it could to find unlawful noncompete agreements and eliminate them.”
The FTC took action on this front one day prior to the abandonment of the 2024 rule by filing a complaint against Gateway Services — a pet cremation company — in which it alleged that the company imposed unlawful noncompetes that prohibited almost all employees from working elsewhere in their industry for up to one year upon leaving the company.