Skip to content

Menu

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

Non-Compete Agreements Under the Biden Administration

By Travis N. Teare on July 19, 2021
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
noncompete

Recently, President Biden issued an Executive Order titled, “Promoting Competition in the American Economy.” Notably, among other things, the Executive Order recommends that the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) curtail the use of non-compete agreements.

The Executive Order seeks to “. . . address agreements that may unduly limit workers’ ability to change jobs” by encouraging the Chair of the FTC to “consider working with the rest of the Commission to exercise the FTC’s statutory rulemaking authority under the Federal Trade Commission Act to curtail the unfair use of non-compete clauses and other clauses or agreements that may unfairly limit worker mobility.” In a Fact Sheet that accompanied the Executive Order the Biden Administration further outlined the seriousness of its policy goals stating that it aims to “tackle some of the most pressing competition problems across our economy” and intends to “make it easier to change jobs and help raise wages by banning or limiting non-compete agreements . . .”

The Executive Order and accompanying Fact Sheet do not change current non-compete law, and do not nullify current non-compete agreements. Instead, they are policy goals of the Biden Administration. As such, non-compete law is still currently controlled by state law.

The Executive Order and accompanying policy statements do, however, show that the Biden Administration is serious about changing non-compete law and is serious about limiting the use of non-compete agreements. As such, employers can expect that the FTC will issue some type of guidance, regulation, or rule addressing the Biden Administration’s concerns – it is unclear when the FTC plans to do so or what the scope of that rule will be. Employers should continue to monitor the situation and take this time to review their non-compete, non-solicitation, and confidentiality agreements to ensure that each is enforceable and not broader than necessary to protect legitimate business interests.

Travis N. Teare

Travis focuses his practice on the representation of management in all aspects of labor and employment law. He has represented management in front of various state and federal administrative agencies, as well as state and federal court. Travis advises and counsels management on…

Travis focuses his practice on the representation of management in all aspects of labor and employment law. He has represented management in front of various state and federal administrative agencies, as well as state and federal court. Travis advises and counsels management on topics including leave management, discrimination, harassment, and retaliation. Travis further provides training to clients on a variety of issues including the interaction between the ADA and FMLA, sexual harassment, and workplace conduct. He has experience in litigation and public sector bargaining. Travis has worked for the State of Ohio’s Office of Collective Bargaining where he responded to unfair labor practice charges and assisted in grievance step hearings, mediations, and arbitrations.

Read more about Travis N. TeareEmailTravis's Linkedin Profile
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Employment & Labor
  • Blog:
    Labor & Employment Law Navigator
  • Organization:
    Frantz Ward LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

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