On March 6, the Federal Trade Commission that it is extending the comment period for its , from March 20 to April 19. ÀÏÅ£Ó°ÊÓwill be commenting in opposition to the proposed rule, which is overly restrictive on well-established and reasonable business practices in the construction industry. The public can submit comments at .  

On Jan. 31, 100 organizations, including ABC, signed a letter urging the FTC to extend the comment period for its for an additional 60 days. The groups argued that the regulated community should be given sufficient time to assess the potential consequences of the rulemaking and develop insightful comments for the FTC to consider. 

In addition, on Feb. 28, ÀÏÅ£Ó°ÊÓjoined 260 organizations in to Congress, urging lawmakers to exercise their oversight and appropriations authority to rein in FTC’s unauthorized rulemaking banning noncompete agreements. The FTC lacks the constitutional or statutory authority to issue such a rule and, in attempting to do so, the agency is improperly usurping the role of Congress.

Background:

On Jan. 5, the FTC issued a  that would ban all noncompete agreements with limited exceptions. According to the FTC, the proposed rule would make it illegal for an employer to:

• Enter into or attempt to enter into a noncompete with a worker;
• Maintain a noncompete with a worker; or
• Represent to a worker, under certain circumstances, that the worker is subject to a noncompete.

On Feb. 2, ÀÏÅ£Ó°ÊÓhosted a webinar to highlight how the proposed rule will affect members and why the FTC’s action is constitutionally suspect and open to a strong legal challenge.  

On Feb. 16, the FTC  hosted a public forum examining the  on their workers. The FTC heard from a series of speakers who have been subjected to noncompete restrictions, as well as business owners who have experience with noncompetes.