No-Poach Agreements

Duke University and UNC No-Poach Faculty Settlement

Duke University is paying $19 million to settle a faculty class action alleging that Duke and the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill agreed not to hire, recruit, or poach each other’s faculty members, thus violating state and federal antitrust laws.  Read more

Geisinger, Evangelical Community No-Poach Agreement Class Action

This class action takes issue with a no-poach agreement allegedly made between Geisinger Health and Evangelical Community Hospital in central Pennsylvania. The complaint alleges that the no-poach agreement reduced competition for healthcare workers in the area and suppressed mobility and wages in that market.  Read more

Broiler Chicken Integrators Grow-Out Services Antitrust Class Action

This antitrust and unfair competition class action brings suit against eleven “vertically-integrated” broiler chicken grower companies under the Tyson, Pilgrim’s Pride, Perdue, Koch, and Sanderson Farms names. The complaint describes these companies as a cartel that has, since at least 2008, conspiring so as “not to compete for Broiler Grow-Out Services, with the purpose and  Read more

Luxury Brands No-Poach Agreements at Saks Stores Antitrust Class Action

Saks is known for its department stores throughout the country. In these stores, certain luxury retailers operate “stores-within-stores” (also known as concessions) in which they sell their goods. The complaint alleges that these luxury retailers have violated antitrust laws by agreeing not to hire each other’s employees.  Read more

HP Age Discrimination Workforce Reduction Plan and Antitrust Class Action

This class action sues HP Enterprise Services, LLC and HP, Inc., for a Workforce Reduction Plan that the complaint says discriminates by age. It points out that, as of October 2015, over 85% of California-based workers terminated under the plan are 40 years of age or older.  Read more

McDonald’s No Poaching of Employees Antitrust Class Action

This class action is another antitrust lawsuit brought because of a fast food company’s “no-poach” policy of refusing to let franchisees compete for each other’s workers. The defendants this time are McDonald’s USA, LLC and McDonald’s Corporation.  Read more

H&R Block No Poaching of Employees Agreements Antitrust Class Action

Agreements in which employers or franchises agree not to hire each other’s workers are known as no-poach agreements. They are common, but they are also not legal, because they violate antitrust laws by restraining competition for workers. Lately, fast-food franchises have been targeted by class actions for their no-poach agreements. This class action bring suit  Read more

Critical Intervention, KKP Antitrust Security Guard Class Action

Can two companies, a law firm, and a few individuals restrain trade in the security guard industry in a state? The complaint for this class action alleges that Critical Intervention Services, Inc. (CIS), the KPP Security Group (KPP), the Solomon Law Group, PA, and four people did exactly that. It alleges that the companies “entered  Read more

H&R Block No-Poach Agreements Antitrust Class Action

H&R Block has over 10,000 of its own offices, in the US and elsewhere, plus 3,300 franchises across the US. The complaint for this class action alleges that the company does not permit its various corporate-owned offices and franchises to compete with each other for employees. Such no-poach agreements violate antitrust laws.   Read more

Arby’s No-Poach Franchise Agreements in Colorado Class Action

This is another among many antitrust class actions being brought against fast food companies for the no-poach clauses in their franchise agreements. As in other cases, the complaint alleges that the clauses are anticompetitive and keep wages low.  Read more