It has long been a burden for those of us in the radio business too. Not only the news directors, but every single member of the staff. The other weapon they use is that they can fire you without cause. Ten years of good work, and they can fire you tomorrow. Sometimes they don't say why. Sometimes they make up a reason. I've seen it all. Radio people are rejoicing as well. Thanks for laying it out Dave. I was wondering what your thoughts were on the issue!
Dave, you mentioned news producers. Holding on to them was a big problem. There are few people, especially experienced ones, who want to be producers. Before producers were put under contracts with no-competes NDs would often “steal” them from another station in town where they were paid less. As an ND I was on both sides of that situation.
Non-compete clauses benefit business owners and managers. But discriminate against employees. This FTC decision is long overdue. There is a misperception in the TV business that Dave did not mention. Station executives erroneously believe that if they lose a popular, highly-paid on-air anchor to the competition, that viewers will follow. In virtually every instance across America, this never happens. Viewers don’t change their habits. Careful viewers in Central Iowa will note that several former anchor/reporters have switched Des Moines TV stations following an absence due to the non-compete clause. It’s good to see them again. And there was no ratings damage to the station they left. But the personalities benefited.
Quoth the above Substack: ". . . .stations should be willing to amply compensate those top people for agreeing to a non-compete clause."
Apparently this is exactly what is happening now; i.e., the contracts all have a non-compete clause and both sides are willingly signed on. Not sure this would be a solution.
Anyway, given the enormous number of contracts negated by this proclamation by Ms Kahn (estimated at 30,000,000 by the WSJ) without express authorization by Congress the chance of this surviving legal challenge is, methinks, virtually zero. See: "major questions doctrine" pushed by the current SCOTUS.
An example of how the "non-compete"is abused. I once offered a PT, weekend radio job in Humboldt to an Iowa Central student. He was so broke I had to give him gas money to get back to Fort Dodge. But an A**hole GM of a Fort Dodge station called to tell me the student has signed a non compete with them. He hadn't worked for them in nearly 6 months, but he wouldn't let the poor kid work for us.
It has long been a burden for those of us in the radio business too. Not only the news directors, but every single member of the staff. The other weapon they use is that they can fire you without cause. Ten years of good work, and they can fire you tomorrow. Sometimes they don't say why. Sometimes they make up a reason. I've seen it all. Radio people are rejoicing as well. Thanks for laying it out Dave. I was wondering what your thoughts were on the issue!
Expert opinion from an expert! Thanks, Dave
Dave, you mentioned news producers. Holding on to them was a big problem. There are few people, especially experienced ones, who want to be producers. Before producers were put under contracts with no-competes NDs would often “steal” them from another station in town where they were paid less. As an ND I was on both sides of that situation.
And then there's the time Dave N, Jr came to Des Moines...
I love your insider’s look at this. It’s always nice to peek behind the curtain. I had no idea about these clauses!
Non-compete clauses benefit business owners and managers. But discriminate against employees. This FTC decision is long overdue. There is a misperception in the TV business that Dave did not mention. Station executives erroneously believe that if they lose a popular, highly-paid on-air anchor to the competition, that viewers will follow. In virtually every instance across America, this never happens. Viewers don’t change their habits. Careful viewers in Central Iowa will note that several former anchor/reporters have switched Des Moines TV stations following an absence due to the non-compete clause. It’s good to see them again. And there was no ratings damage to the station they left. But the personalities benefited.
Quoth the above Substack: ". . . .stations should be willing to amply compensate those top people for agreeing to a non-compete clause."
Apparently this is exactly what is happening now; i.e., the contracts all have a non-compete clause and both sides are willingly signed on. Not sure this would be a solution.
Anyway, given the enormous number of contracts negated by this proclamation by Ms Kahn (estimated at 30,000,000 by the WSJ) without express authorization by Congress the chance of this surviving legal challenge is, methinks, virtually zero. See: "major questions doctrine" pushed by the current SCOTUS.
Non-competes in health care are very controversial. Patients left in the dust.
An example of how the "non-compete"is abused. I once offered a PT, weekend radio job in Humboldt to an Iowa Central student. He was so broke I had to give him gas money to get back to Fort Dodge. But an A**hole GM of a Fort Dodge station called to tell me the student has signed a non compete with them. He hadn't worked for them in nearly 6 months, but he wouldn't let the poor kid work for us.