Unstuck

Hi Recruiters,

I was once asked to sign a non-compete agreement just to be interviewed.?

I’ll say that again.

A company made me sign a non-compete before an INTERVIEW.

I ended up working for this company for more than 18 months. By the time I was ready to move on, I had completely forgotten about signing that document. But, I surely will never forget when they sued me for going to work for one of their competitors.

True story.

As a 20-something junior professional, I had to lawyer up so that I could advance in my career and escape a job I saw no future in.

The kicker? We discovered that they were suing me as a revenge move to get back at the competitor for previously poaching employees. In fact, that discovery was what forced them to reach a settlement.

Fortunately, I was cleared to take the new job. Unfortunately, despite the settlement, I was still barred from working within the new companies’ U.S. operations for two years.

I hate non-competes. Like, more than anything.

They’re outdated today, and they were outdated back then (for those wondering when “then” was, Gangnam Style was the internet sensation of the time). So, you can imagine how I feel about the FTCs recent decision to ban non-competes and the firms that will be fighting against the ban.

Because I have a personal history with non-competes, I wanted to weigh in on the discussion and hear what recruiters are saying.

Ancient History

All of the talk about the ban a few weeks ago had me going down a rabbit hole. I was enlightened when I came across a post from James Hornick pointing out that non-competes are rooted in the medieval system of apprenticeship.

Essentially, a master craftsman who took on and trained an apprentice would sometimes enter into an agreement stating the apprentice could not compete with the master after the apprenticeship.

Fast-forward to modern times, and corporate non-competes have gotten out of hand. They expanded from an early focus on limiting the movement of senior-level skills, trade secrets, and IP to encompass broad restrictions on even lower-level employees as a scare tactic. In James’ words, “Companies pay for lawyers to file suits against people who can’t afford to fight them. The types of dum dum companies whose only means of retaining employees is ‘you’ll never work in this town again!’ fear-mongering.”

It’s about control. And, the effect on employees has been a wet blanket, limiting opportunities by:

• Restricting job mobility
• Forcing individuals to leave their occupations if they want to change jobs
• Reducing the bargaining power of employees

While the FTC’s ruling is good news for employees, I argue it’s also good news for companies (well, good companies) and will usher in a new era of competitive recruiting.

James said it better than I could: “The ban will have a positive effect on well-run companies. Those orgs will grow as they pick off talent from their miserable-to-work-for competitors.”

Recruiter’s POV

What do recruiters think? Here are a few reactions from the field.

Recruiter Kelly Hansen : “In 2018 I left my recruiting agency job to join a start-up. In that departure, I signed a 2 year non-compete. After the FTC ruling yesterday, that won't happen any more ??. And not to toot my own horn (??toot toot??), but perhaps I am a dangerously strong recruiter if a firm was adamant about not letting me compete in the field for 24 months ??”

Keith Lee , Healthcare and manufacturing headhunter: “Employees will have the freedom to choose where they want to work.”

Executive recruiter Jennifer Abrahamson : “As someone who has recruited within the medical space over the last decade, I’ve seen firsthand the massive impact non-competes can have on an organization’s ability to procure the best talent. This ban could mark an interesting shift in the war for talent.”

Matt Beerer , recruiting leader for manufacturers: “The companies that have a great culture, provide a recruiter with every opportunity for success and pay well will not be worried about the ruling. Many others might be getting nervous…”

TA Leader Preston Peery : “Whatever the final outcome (already pending legal challenges), I believe it will remove restrictions on where employees can work. This will force companies to compete for talent with better offers, not limitations. More ‘carrot,’ less ‘stick.’”

Looks like I’m not alone.

What’s Next

For now, nothing has really changed. But, the conversations and reactions online have functioned as a temperature check on the public.

The temp? I’d say it’s burning hot — for innovation, creativity, and competition. People are tired of feeling stuck.

Recruiters, you know what to do.

What else is happening in hiring?

• The Vital Role in Talent Source in Crafting EVP by Quentin Sebastian
• North Korean IT Workers Tricking US Companies to Hire Them?
• GE Aerospace Hiring 900 Engineers This Year

Aaron’s Corner

Aaron Iba?ez here to remind you to register for Tuesday's F.R.B.R. Conference presented by hireEZ! We're excited for another round of recruiting leaders to share their wisdom with our growing recruitment community. Get involved today with these quick to-dos:

1. Register to attend Tuesday's virtual event: https://explore.hireez.com/frbr-conference-recxrec/
2. Follow these amazing speakers: Tiffany Lee Rachel Cupples Neha Rupani, SPHR Ryan Fish, SPHR, MBA Steve Jewell Jody Simon ??Chris "Aquaman" Carver?? Daniel Harten
3. Find your tribe in hireEZ's Community, where you can stay informed about upcoming events and connect with over 1000 other talent acquisition pros. hireEZ users, join the Community: https://community.hireez.com/home Non-users, join the waitlist: https://explore.hireez.com/ora-community-waitlist/

— Recruiters