Blessinger was an accountant and then managing director of Galusha, Hiigins, Galusha, PC when the company merged with Wipfli in 2015. At the time of the merger, he signed a confidentiality and agreement agreement, but says he received no promotion, increase or bonus in exchange for signing the agreement. Wipfli completed the hiring of Blessinger on May 4, 2020. The letter of dismissal indicates in part that the examples mentioned below are at a very early stage, it is difficult to predict how the courts will approach this issue. Historically, many courts have expressed a general aversion to the imposition of alliances in situations where workers have been innocently dismissed by their employers. Will the additional factor of the global pandemic increase the likelihood that courts will not find these non-competition bans and other restrictive agreements unworkable? Fisher Phillips will continue to monitor these cases and inform them of developments. Our firm also regularly represents individuals with respect to their competition and confidentiality agreements. Depending on the worker`s occupation, employers may include a non-compete clause as part of a non-compete agreement or a non-compete agreement with a severance agreement. A non-compete agreement is a contract between a worker and an employer that provides that the outgoing worker agrees not to start or create a similar profession in competition with the employer in a geographic area after the termination of the employment. The non-competition agreement generally applies for a fixed period and/or a limited geographical area after demendesat. In clearing the shares, the District Court ruled that the public interest does not promote a ban on competitive employment when the United States has faced the highest unemployment rates in more than seven decades. Some states agree with this reasoning.
For example, a number of state and federal courts in New York have ruled that non-competitors are not applicable if an employee is dismissed without cause. See z.B. SIFCO Indus. advanced Plating Technologies, 867 F. Supp. 155 (S.D.N.Y. 1995) (refusal to enforce competition agreements against executives after plant closure). Similarly, the federal courts that study Illinois law have reached the same conclusion. See Rao v. Rao, 718 F.2d 219 (7. Cir.
1983) (claiming that a restrictive alliance is not applicable when an employee is dismissed in bad faith and without cause). The economic disruption of the coronavirus pandemic is leading to mass layoffs across the country, some of which could be permanent. Some of these laid-off workers will no doubt be bound by restrictive agreements and non-competitors. Many employers and workers will therefore wonder whether this inability to compete is still applicable, given that the dismissal was involuntary. As with most competition contract issues, there is no uniform answer that applies at the federal level. On the contrary, the answer depends to a large extent on the state in which the company and the staff are located. After the court ruled that SV Sports Snyder terminated the employment on March 30, 2020 following the dismissal of COVID-19, the court ruled that Snyder`s non-compete contract was not applicable. It is significant that the applicable agreement contained a provision stating that it was enforceable only in the event of Snyder`s resignation or termination for “just cause,” and “not in situations where the position is terminated without the employee`s fault.” The court also found that Snyder`s duty of loyalty and any duty of non-appeal he owed in the personnel manual has been extinguished, so that he is free to join CI and question other staff members dismissed by SV Sports.