旅行顾问关系风的另一个变化
byPaul Ruden/I know that “non-compete” agreements are used in some situations in the travel advisor space but have not seen any reliable data on the extent of their use. With a few exceptions, these agreements have been legally judged based on the individual circumstances of their creation and effect. While some states have banned them altogether, most have allowed them when their geographical scope and duration are judged reasonable.
美国联邦贸易委员会(Federal Trade Commission)现在提出禁止uch agreements outright with very limited exceptions related to sales of businesses and franchisor-franchisee relationships. The NPRM may be read in its complex and lengthy entirety in the联邦登记册,位于88 FR 3482. Comments are due March 20, 2023. More than five thousand have already been filed.
如果按照提议采用,则该规则将适用于“雇主与工人之间的任何合同条款,以防止工人在工人与雇主的雇用结束后与某人寻求或接受企业或经营企业。”像往常一样,“合同规定是非竞争条款是否取决于该条款的称呼,而是该规定的运作方式。”提出的规则是无所不包的。例如:
拟议的规则将把“工人”定义为雇主的自然人,无论是付费还是无偿。…“工人”一词包括一个雇员,分类为独立承包商,外部,实习生,志愿者,学徒或独资经营者,他们为客户或客户提供服务。
Even so-called “gig economy” workers would be subject to the rule.
The rule would make it an unfair competitive practice in violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act, section 5 for,
雇主enter into或者attempt to enterinto a non-compete clause with a worker; tomaintainwith a worker a non-compete clause; or, under certain circumstances, torepresentto a worker that the worker is subject to a non-compete clause. [emphasis added]
该规则将迫使任何公司与任何工人有效的公司rescind根据肯定行为的条款。如果雇主有合理的与这些人进行沟通的手段,则必须向遭受限制的前雇员发出撤销通知。如书面,该规则适用于所有工人,包括“高级管理人员”,但根据评论,该提案的每个主要要素都需要修订。但是,FTC的竞争效果分析很明显,任何提出重大变化的人,更不用说彻底撤离,都面临着说服力的沉重负担。FTC估计,五分之一的美国工人遵守非竞争协议(3000万工人)。
FTC提出了这一新法规,因为,
… research has shown the use of non-compete clauses by employers has negatively affected competition in labor markets, resulting in reduced wages for workers across the labor force—including workers not bound by non-compete clauses.(3)这项研究还表明,通过抑制劳动力流动性,非竞争条款以多种方式对产品和服务市场的竞争产生了负面影响。
Importantly, the proposed ban does not extend to other types of restrictive employment agreements, such as non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) and customer solicitation restrictions (unless它们是如此广泛,以至于它们充当非竞争)。还有其他可能性,例如需要偿还培训费用的规定和违反条款。一切都是可能的,但将受到这样的原则,即如果它们充当非竞争力,将被禁止。显然,整个过程充满了不确定性和风险。
The proposed rules are written so that every travel agency, consortium, cooperative or other legal entity that contracts by any means with anyone else to work for it is an “employer.” Size is irrelevant. A one-person “agency” that contracts with independent contractors will be an “employer” subject to the rule.
因此,如果根据提议的规则被基本采用,那么与顾问或独立承包商达成非竞争协议的任何旅行社都必须在最终规则出版后的180天内取消这些协议。它们可能被NDA,非验证以及其他就业后限制性协议所取代假如那些没有有效地离开员工/IC的人与前机构竞争新业务。由于这些是建立就业关系后做出的新安排,因此他们可能需要根据州法律的新“考虑”才能执行。每个拥有非竞争力的机构都应就如何正确完成此操作咨询律师。
An interesting aspect of this proposal is that air carriers and foreign air carriers are exempt from the Federal Trade Commission Act because they are “regulated” by the Department of Transportation under the Federal Aviation Act. The proposed ban on non-competes will not apply to those businesses. DoT will have to act to extend the rule to those entities. It could do so whether or not the FTC finalizes its own proposal. In any case, this process of changing federal law fundamentally is going to take a very long time.
要意识到的另一个偶然性是国会进行了采购后诉讼和/或干预的可能性,这些诉讼和/或干预措施在过去的时期中限制了限制其判断被判断的FTC行动。威尔逊专员对NPRM发表了长期的异议。她还对最近提出的关于“垃圾费”的规则制定的预先通知不反对。尽管目前构成的国会不太可能通过立法来干扰FTC规则制定过程,但在该NPRM仍在评估的情况下可能会改变。
For now, then, watchful waiting is in order. Advisors are free, of course, to share their views with the FTC by March 20 onthe Regulations.gov comment site.