Have you heard about the non-solicit suit involving communications on LinkedIn? Well, it seems that an employer in Minnesota is suing former employees and their new employer over violations of the employees’ non-solicitation agreements. The twist is that one of the employees allegedly did her solicitation through her LinkedIn page, communicating with several former colleagues after going to work for a competitor.
Follow the link for the bizjournals.com article.
Some commentators are raising red flags — do your non-compete agreements address social media communications; are your trade secrets at risk in the brave new world of social media? Could this be the start of a . . . . wait for it . . . .litigation explosion?!
Unlikely. In fact, I believe that this points to some good news for employers. Social media is a new means of communication but it is still communication like e-mail, telephones, and faxes.
Like the older forms of communication, there are appropriate and inappropriate social media communications. No one would suggest that a non-solicit agreement means that an employee cannot call a former co-worker on the telephone and chat about politics, sports, fashion, or just about anything except soliciting the co-worker to leave his or her employer.
The same is true of social media. It is only the inappropriate communications that are cause for concern, but there is good news for employers when it comes to these communications. Unlike older forms of communication, social media communication is largely visible and leaves an indelible record. If your ex-employee is foolish enough to solicit former co-workers or customers via social media, you have the proverbial smoking gun to enforce your restrictive covenants. Such evidence is far superior to disputed testimony over what was discussed in a phone call or lunch meeting, which is standard issue in most litigation over non-solicitation agreements.
As with many other employment related claims, the biggest impact of social media may be in the way in which evidence is gathered and claims are established, rather than in the development of a novel type of claim.
Let me know what you think. You'll find a link to my email at the CONTACT line below.
Topics/Tags
Select- Labor & Employment Law
- NLRB
- EEOC
- Department of Labor
- Discrimination
- Reasonable Accommodation
- Non-Compete Agreements
- Pregnancy Discrimination
- NLRA
- Employment Law
- Coronavirus
- Artificial Intelligence
- Diversity
- Inclusion
- LGBTQ+
- Labor Law
- National Labor Relations Board
- Wage & Hour
- Privacy
- FLSA
- Overtime Pay
- Federal Trade Commission
- Employee Benefits and Executive Compensation
- FMLA
- Workplace Accommodations
- Arbitration
- Employment Litigation
- Workplace Violence
- Religion Discrimination
- Medical Marijuana
- IRS
- Litigation
- Social Media
- Employer Policies
- Americans with Disabilities Act
- Disability Discrimination
- Retirement
- National Labor Relations Act
- Accommodation
- Sexual Orientation Discrimination
- Race Discrimination
- OSHA
- Employer Handbook
- Medical Cannabis Dispensaries
- ERISA
- ADAAA
- Whistleblower
- United States Supreme Court
- Unions
- ACA
- Affordable Car Act
- Title VII
- Employer Rules
- Sexual Harassment
- Technology
- Federal Arbitration Act
- Transgender Issues
- Disability
- 401(k)
- Employment Settlement Agreements
- Sixth Circuit
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
- Fair Labor Standards Act
- Paycheck Protection Program
- Benefits
- Gender Identity Discrimination
- Posting Requirements
- Class Action Litigation
- Disability Law
- Securities Law
- E-Discovery
- Evidence
- Preventive Care Benefits
- Health Savings Account
- Environmental Law
- Family and Medical Leave Act
- SECURE Act
- Privacy Laws
- US Department of Labor Employee Benefits Security Administration
- Representative Election Regulations
- Department of Justice
- Healthcare Reform
- Older Workers' Benefit Protection Act (OWBPA)
- Telecommuting
- Affirmative Action
- Compensable Time
- Electronically Stored Information
- Equal Opportunity Clause
- Security Screening
- Supreme Court
- E-Discovery Case Law
- Electronic Data Discovery
- ESI
- Occupational Safety and Health Administration
- Attendance Policy
- Return to Work
- Seniority Rights
- Unemployment Insurance Integrity Act
- American Medical Association
- Classification
- Confidentiality
- Disability Leave
- Equal Pay
- Fair Minimum Wage
- Federal Minimum Wage
- Genetic Information Discrimination
- Media Policy
- Misclassification
- National Origin Discrimination
- Retaliation
- Social Media Content
- State Minimum Wage
- Wage Increase
- Taxation
- Antitrust
- Employment Incentives
- HIRE Act
- Social Security Tax
Recent Posts
- Uncertain Ground: The NLRB, EEOC, and the Fallout of Presidential Firings
- What’s Next for the Department of Labor? The Confirmation of Lori Chávez-DeRemer
- Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion: Where Things Stand in Response to Actions Taken by President Trump
- Recent Executive Orders’ Impact on the EEOC
- NLRB Acting General Counsel Rescinds Numerous Predecessor’s Memoranda
- Federal Court Overturns Expansion of Overtime Requirements
- U.S. Supreme Court to Review Title VII Reverse Discrimination Case
- NLRB General Counsel Expands Focus on Non-Compete Agreements and Stay-Or-Pay Agreements
- FTC's Non-Compete Rule Struck Down
- District Court Finds in Favor of FTC, Declines to Issue Injunction