Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

Government Targets eBay’s Alleged “No Hire” Agreements

By James Kachmar on November 30, 2012
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

One focus of this blog is how an employer’s use of non-compete agreements often runs afoul of California’s Business and Professions Code section 16600. Generally, the employer finds that its “non-compete” agreement will be held unenforceable by a court should it seek to enforce one against a former employee. But what can happen when one employer “agrees” with another employer not to recruit or hire each other’s employees?

On November 16, 2012, the U.S. Department of Justice and California’s Attorney General filed separate lawsuits against eBay, Inc. alleging violation of antitrust laws arising out of such an agreement. (The State of California’s lawsuit also names Intuit, Inc. as a co-conspirator.) The lawsuit arises out of an investigation conducted by the U.S. Department of Justice in 2009-10 into “no-hire” arrangements between high-tech firms in Silicon Valley.

The complaints allege that between 2006-2009, eBay and Intuit had a “handshake” agreement that they would not recruit or hire each other’s employees. This alleged agreement arose out of a “war for talent” that Silicon Valley firms experienced while competing for a limited number of employees with highly specialized knowledge, skills and experience in the technology industry. The “handshake” agreement was apparently the subject of several emails between eBay and Intuit executives that are cited in the complaints. While the agreement appears to initially have begun as a no-recruiting policy, it apparently morphed into a “no-hire” agreement, even when an applicant (employed by one of the companies) approached the other for employment unsolicited. The complaints allege that the agreement between eBay and Intuit harmed the market for these employees by limiting their job mobility and “affected employees’ ability to secure better compensation, benefits, and working conditions.”

Similar lawsuits were filed by the U.S. Department of Justice in 2010 against Adobe Systems, Inc., Apple, Inc., Google, Inc., Intel Corporation and Pixar. Those lawsuits were apparently resolved when the companies agreed not to engage in further “no-hire” agreements. (A separate class action civil lawsuit brought by affected employees is still pending against these companies.) eBay is alleged to have halted its “no-hire” agreement with Intuit in or about 2009 when it learned of the federal government’s investigation into such agreements.

Employers are again reminded to proceed with caution when considering whether and how to restrict a former employee’s ability to compete.

Photo of James Kachmar James Kachmar

James is a shareholder in Weintraub Tobin’s litigation section.  He represents corporate and individual clients in both state and federal courts in various business litigation matters, including trade secret misappropriation, unfair business competition, stockholder disputes, and intellectual property disputes.

Read more about James KachmarEmailJames's Linkedin Profile
  • Posted in:
    Antitrust, Competition and Trade, Employment & Labor
  • Organization:
    Weintraub Tobin

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo