The FTC’s workshop on noncompetes — “Moving Forward: Protecting Workers from Anticompetitive Noncompete Agreements” — is going forward, but has been doomed from the start.
Initially scheduled for this past October 8, the workshop was canceled because of the government shutdown.
Then, in December, the FTC rescheduled it for next Tuesday, January 27, 2026, from 1:00-5:00 PM, both in person and streaming. I had registered to attend in person and even got an email earlier this week asking me to confirm my in-person attendance (which I did), as it seems it was heavily subscribed.
Well, yesterday, the FTC announced that the workshop will be virtual only: “Due to expectation of inclement weather, this event will be held virtually. A livestream link will be available on this page.”
That’s unfortunate.
The FTC’s in-person workshop in 2020 was far more interactive than the more stilted workshop it held at the end of 2021.
Workshop Agenda
The agenda for this workshop seems, once again, to present predominantly anti-noncompete viewpoints:
- Welcome and Introductions
- Kelse Moen, Deputy Director, Bureau of Competition, Federal Trade Commission
- 1:00 pm
- Keynote Address
- Chairman Andrew N. Ferguson, Federal Trade Commission
- 1:30-2:30 pm
- Panel 1: Locked out of Work: Victims of Anticompetitive Noncompete Agreements
- Moderator: Logan Wilke, Federal Trade Commission
- Panelists:
- C.J. Caniglia, DVM, DACVS-LA
- Cindy Holbrook Jennifer Kendall, DO
- Selvam Mascarenhas, MD, MBA, FACP
- 2:30 pm
- Statement of Commissioner Mark R. Meador, Federal Trade Commission
- 3:00-4:00 pm
- Panel 2: Unleashing the American Worker: Policy Perspectives on Noncompetes
- Moderator: Kelse Moen, Federal Trade Commission
- Panelists:
- Chris Griswold, American Compass
- John W. Lettieri, Economic Innovation Group
- Mark Woodward, Federal Trade Commission
- Jonathan Berry, U.S. Department of Labor
- 4:00-5:00 pm
- Panel 3: Counting the Costs: The Economics of Noncompetes
- Moderator: Miriam Larson-Koester, Federal Trade Commission
- Panelists: Evan Starr, University of Maryland
- David J. Balan, Econ One Research
- Devesh Raval, Federal Trade Commission
- Bruce Kobayashi, George Mason University
Well, stay tuned to next week. Should be interesting to see where this goes. I will remain hopeful that all viewpoints will in fact be represented, and we can finally have an honest policy debate.
Other Developments
In the meantime, there have been several other developments at the FTC:
- November 17, 2025, was Commissioner Holyoak’s last day at the FTC. She resigned to become the Interim US Attorney General for Utah. As a result, as of today, there are only two of five FTC Commissioners: Chair Andrew Ferguson and Commissioner Mark Meador.
- On November 26, 2025, the FTC “finalized a consent order” against Gateway Services (the pet cremation company) for using noncompetes for “almost all of its employees.”
- On December 10, 2025, Staffing Industry Analysts (reproducing an article from Modern Healthcare) reported the names of the “several large healthcare employers and staffing firms” that the FTC sent letters to “urging them to conduct a comprehensive review of their employment agreements—including any noncompetes or other restrictive agreements—to ensure they are appropriately tailored and comply with the law.” Based on a response to a FOIA request, the “several” employers and firms were: Nashville, Tennessee-based HCA, Dallas-based Tenet, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania-based UHS, AMN Healthcare; Amergis Healthcare Staffing; Brentwood, Tennessee-based Ardent Health; CHG Healthcare; Birmingham, Alabama-based Encompass Health; Enhabit Home Health & Hospice; Envision Healthcare; Ingenovis Health; Jackson Healthcare; Brentwood, Tennessee-based Lifepoint Health; Medical Solutions; Ontario, California-based Prime Healthcare; Louisville, Kentucky-based ScionHealth; Select Medical; Soliant Health; TeamHealth; and Triage Staffing.
- On December 19, 2025, the FTC sued and issued a proposed consent order against several related building services contractor companies — Adamas Amenity Services LLC, Adamas Building Services LLC, Adamas Concierge LLC, Adamas Parking Services LLC, and Adamas Security LLC — for using no-hire agreements that allegedly “restrict building owners and management companies across New Jersey and New York City from directly hiring workers employed by Adamas without a significant penalty . . . .” According to the FTC, “Adamas’ no-hire agreements . . . prevent building owners and management companies from indirectly hiring Adamas’ employees through any competing building service contractor.” Supposedly, “Adamas’ no-hire agreements also limit the ability of building owners to seek or accept bids from any of Adamas’ competitors due to the chance of losing long-serving employees.”
* * *
*A huge thank you to Erika Hahn for all of her extraordinary help in monitoring all of the recent FTC developments.