Fierce Competition Podcast | Antitrust Collusion in Labor Markets: Enforcement Trends on Both Sides of the Atlantic
#WorkforceWednesday: ACA Preventive Coverage Mandate Blocked, Another No-Poach Loss for DOJ, and Employers Prepare for the End of the COVID-19 Emergencies - Employment Law This Week®
Taking the Pulse, A Health Care and Life Sciences Podcast | Episode 100: Marguerite Willis, Nexsen Pruet Attorney
Four days before President Trump took office, the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) and Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) (together, “the Agencies”) under the Biden administration released their “Antitrust Guidelines for Business...more
Wage-fixing and “no-poach” agreements between employers are now illegal under the Competition Act, subject to limited exceptions. While the Competition Bureau has issued guidelines regarding its intended approach to enforcing...more
At the end of last year, the US Department of Justice (DOJ) secured a guilty plea for wage fixing, resulting in its first criminal conviction with Assistant Attorney General Jonathan Kanter saying: “[t]oday’s guilty plea...more
When Bill C-19, Budget Implementation Act, 2022, No. 1 received Royal Assent in June 2022, it amended Canada’s Competition Act (Act) by including a new provision, s. 45(1.1), which comes into force on June 23, 2023. Section...more
In July of 2021, President Biden issued Executive Order 14036, which affirmed the executive branch’s policy to enforce antitrust laws. Two aspects of the Order relate directly to employment law...more
Takeaways - ..The Biden administration’s recent executive order takes a hard line on limits to employment mobility, such as non-compete agreements. ..No-poach agreements—companies agreeing not to recruit each other’s...more
The Antitrust Division has warned companies that it would bring criminal indictments against companies that enter into illegal no-poach or wage-fixing agreements. The Antitrust Division has now put its money where its mouth...more
Even in the absence of an agreement to fix compensation, simply exchanging competitively sensitive information could serve as evidence of an implicit illegal agreement. On October 20, the Department of Justice (DOJ) and...more