The agreements against employees “theft” or “hunting” were devised as measures that seek to protect the growth and interests of employers. These can be described as mechanisms through which two or more employers avoid hiring personnel on the payroll of other companies. These agreements are created in order to avoid using the hiring process as a way to “take employees away from each other.”
While this makes a given employer’s workforce more stable, it also has the negative effect of creating an unstable environment where it’s more difficult for employees to grow in their careers. As a result, a barrier is created that prevents employees from moving to new opportunities that allow such growth.
After years of “discussing what needed to be discussed” and very gradual action, workers across the country saw the first signs of persecution against “employee theft” agreements. These signs were visible in the form of advisory warnings issued by both the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).
These warnings informed companies and human resource professionals about the application of federal antitrust laws focused on hiring practices. These warnings explicitly stated for the first time that the agreements above are carried out under the risk of persecution of those who decide to participate in them.
After years of making its position clear through various gestures and statements, this persecution allowed the DOJ to fully affirm that anti-“employee theft” agreements are considered illegal. Additionally, they disproportionately and unfairly impact the labor market. Taking action against agreements that actively diminish employees’ growth potential is an essential step in the right direction. These actions give workers the ability to aspire to a better employment status that reflects their time and effort into what they do.