Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
CommunitySub-MenuPublishersChannelsProductsSub-MenuBlog ProBlog PlusBlog PremierMicrositeSyndication PortalsAboutContactResourcesSubscribeSupport
Join
Search
Close

Antitrust Agencies Issue Statement on Enforcement in Essential Provider Labor Markets

By Michael S. Denniston & John W. Hargrove on April 20, 2020
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

Antitrust Agencies Issue Statement on Enforcement in Essential Provider Labor MarketsAntitrust concerns aren’t always at top of mind for human resources professionals. However, the federal antitrust agencies, the Federal Trade Commission and Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice, remind us that antitrust law certainly applies to employment decisions.  The agencies recently issued a policy statement, Joint Antitrust Statement Regarding COVID-19 and Competition in Labor Markets, that reminds employers of antitrust danger areas during the pandemic crisis.

For years, the agencies have challenged unlawful wage-fixing and no-poach agreements, anticompetitive non-compete agreements, and the unlawful exchange of competitively sensitive employee information, including salary, wages, benefits, and compensation data. In 2016, the agencies issued Antitrust Guidance for Human Resource Professionals. The agencies intended that guidance to alert human resource professionals and others involved in hiring and compensation decisions to potential violations of the antitrust laws. That guidance highlights two areas for concern. First, the agencies will prosecute agreements among employers not to recruit certain employees or not to compete on terms of compensation. Second, the agencies caution against sharing competitively sensitive information, such as current wage information, among competitors.

In the recent policy statement, the agencies focus that guidance in light of the pandemic crisis.  They are closely monitoring coordination among employers where the coordination may disadvantage workers in certain fields. Recognizing that some collaboration among competitors may be necessary to fight the pandemic and are procompetitive, they will not “tolerate anticompetitive conduct that harms workers, including doctors, nurses, first responders, and those who work in grocery stores, pharmacies, and warehouses, among other essential service providers on the front lines of addressing the crisis.”

Takeaways

  • The COVID-19 pandemic presents unique opportunities for companies to engage in procompetitive collaborations, such as joint purchasing arrangements and joint research and development efforts. However, companies must make sure any collaborative effort complies with the antitrust laws.
  • The agencies will prosecute agreements between competitors on employment issues, including agreements concerning salaries and wages, compensation and benefits, reductions in force, and not poaching employees.
  • They will give particular scrutiny to agreements or other coordination between competitors on employment issues affecting workers on the front line of responding to the pandemic.
  • Companies will face many difficult employment decisions over the coming months. We’re prepared to guide you through both the labor and employment issues you regularly address and also the antitrust pitfalls that concern these agencies.
Photo of Michael S. Denniston Michael S. Denniston

Mike Denniston’s practice focuses on advising and litigating for clients concerning antitrust and competition law and intellectual property issues. His practice spans the breadth of the antitrust and intellectual property arena. Mike’s antitrust practice encompasses not only litigation and advising clients, but also…

Mike Denniston’s practice focuses on advising and litigating for clients concerning antitrust and competition law and intellectual property issues. His practice spans the breadth of the antitrust and intellectual property arena. Mike’s antitrust practice encompasses not only litigation and advising clients, but also working closely with the firm’s Corporate and Securities Practice Group on merger analysis and preparing transactions for premerger review pursuant to the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act.

Read more about Michael S. DennistonEmail Michael's Linkedin Profile
Show more Show less
Photo of John W. Hargrove John W. Hargrove

John Hargrove is chair of the Labor and Employment Practice Group and is a Fellow in the American College of Labor and Employment Lawyers. He regularly represents public and private companies in mining, construction, manufacturing, medical, communications and warehousing industries, among others. He…

John Hargrove is chair of the Labor and Employment Practice Group and is a Fellow in the American College of Labor and Employment Lawyers. He regularly represents public and private companies in mining, construction, manufacturing, medical, communications and warehousing industries, among others. He also represents municipal and quasi-public organizations such as police and fire departments and school boards. John also has represented several nonprofit agencies, ranging from national sports organizations to small local charities.

Read more about John W. HargroveEmail John's Linkedin Profile
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Employment & Labor
  • Blog:
    Labor & Employment Insights
  • Organization:
    Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

LexBlog, Inc. logo
Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
Real Lawyers
99 Park Row
  • About LexBlog
  • Careers
  • Press
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Privacy Policy
  • Editorial Policy
  • Disclaimer
  • Terms of Service
  • RSS Terms of Service
  • Products
  • Blog Pro
  • Blog Plus
  • Blog Premier
  • Microsite
  • Syndication Portals
  • LexBlog Community
  • 1-800-913-0988
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
  • Resource Center

New to the Network

  • Boston ERISA & Insurance Litigation Blog
  • Stridon News and Insights
  • Taft Class Action & Consumer Insights
  • Labor and Employment Law Insights
  • Age of Disruption
Copyright © 2022, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo