How Do I Get A Copy Of My Noncompete Without Alarming Management?

 You don't have a copy of your noncompete and can't figure out how to get one without asking management, who would definitely penalize you just for asking. You want to leave but the only option you think you have would be a competitor. Or you signed a bunch of documents you didn't read when you started called stuff like Confidentiality Agreement or Bonus Agreement and now you think you might have signed a noncompete.

If you’re a regular reader of my blog, you know that I always recommend you get a copy of everything you sign. This is a good example of why. How are you supposed to know what your restrictions are if you don’t have a copy of your agreement?

But you didn’t keep a copy of your noncompete agreement, and now you have to figure out how to get a copy without alarming HR and management. There are several ways you might try. You’ll have to figure out which one works best in your company culture:

Ask to look at your personnel file: While some states have a law saying companies have to give you access to your personnel file, most don’t. There's none here in Florida. Still, sometimes employers will allow you to review your personnel file if you ask. Hopefully, the noncompete will be in there. What excuse do you give for asking? You could say you want to see what deductions you listed on your W-4, review your insurance election, or take a look at your last review as some examples of what might give you a non-alarming excuse to review the file. Of course, they could just be nice and give you a copy of the document you say you’re looking for, so this might backfire.

Ask a coworker for theirs: If you have a coworker you trust who keeps better records than you, you might ask them to share their noncompete agreement. Yours is probably similar, but if you started different years or have different jobs, the two agreements could be quite different. If you’re sure that everyone has the same agreement, this is a possibility that might work for you.

Look at court records: If your employer sues former employees for noncompete violations, then pull the case file. The coworker’s noncompetition agreement should be attached to the very first document, called something like a “Complaint.” This only works if you’re pretty sure the coworker had the same agreement as you.

Ask someone friendly in management: Sometimes, your boss or a friend in HR may be willing to get you a copy on the sly.

Ask for the agreement: I know you don’t want to tell an unfriendly supervisor or the evil HR lady you need a copy, but this is the only straightforward way to get a copy of your actual agreement. You might say you lost your copy and want to make sure you have a copy for your records (and this is completely true) or try to come up with some other excuse. Or, you can wait until you get a job offer and then ask for it. That way, you at least have a place to go if you get fired because they think you’re looking to leave.

What do you do if they refuse to give you a copy? I think it’s silly, but some companies like to hold onto the noncompete agreements employees have signed like they’re the secret recipe to KFC, but I don’t understand this. Companies should want employees to know what their post-employment restrictions are. HR folks should make sure employees keep a copy for themselves. How can they comply if they don’t know what the restrictions are? Nobody has ever been able to explain this to me.

If this happens to you, and you have a job offer or actual plans to start a business, I suggest sending them something like this: “It is my understanding that I do not have any restrictive covenants that would keep me from working for a competitor or forming my own business. If this is incorrect, please send me a copy of any and all agreements I signed or am alleged to have signed while employed by you within 72 hours from the date of this email. If I do not receive the alleged agreements by that time, I will assume I have no restrictions and will govern myself accordingly.” Obviously, this will set off alarm bells like crazy, so I don’t recommend this unless you have somewhere to go.

Sounds like lots of trouble to go through all this, huh? Next time, make sure you keep a copy of anything you sign at work, and make sure you take it home or keep it in your briefcase so they can’t grab it if you are fired. And don’t forget to read it carefully before you sign so you know and understand your post-employment restrictions. The time to negotiate is before you sign.

What Can I Do If I Lost A Job Due To A Background Check?

 If your employer or potential employer is going to run a credit check, then they must comply with the Fair Credit Reporting Act. This requirement covers anything the employer is getting from a consumer reporting agency that covers personal and credit characteristics, character, general reputation, or lifestyle, but not the HR department running your name on Google, checking out your Facebook page, or reading your blog. So it depends on who did the background check.

If they are going to run a background check that is considered to be a credit check, and they are hiring an outside agency to do it, they have to give you a document solely for the purpose of telling you they intend to conduct a credit check. It was possibly shoved in with a stack of papers they handed you with your application or pre-employment forms. They need your permission in writing.

They must also tell you if they’re about to deny a job, reassign, or terminate you because of what was disclosed in a credit report. They must give you written notice with a copy of your credit report and a document called "A Summary of Your Rights Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act.”

Once the employer decides to use the report against you, they must then give another notice, this time telling you the name of the agency that did the credit report, saying the agency isn’t the one that made the adverse decision, and telling you how to dispute the information in the report with the agency. This notice can be verbal or in writing, unless you’re a trucker, in which case it must be written.

If an employer runs your credit history though a third party agency without permission, they’ve broken the law. 

But let's say they run the background check themselves. They check your social media and find out, for instance, your race, that you have a disability, that you have a family history of a genetic disease, or that you're pregnant. They aren't allowed to turn you down for a job or fire you on that basis. That's illegal discrimination, and you might have a discrimination case.

If they find an arrest or conviction record, then there are some states that don't allow them to use this against you. Florida is not one of those states. EEOC has taken the position that a blanket refusal to hire based on criminal records can be discrimination, but I haven't seen any cases supporting such a claim. If you are, for instance, male and a female with the same record is not excluded but you are, that could certainly be a discrimination claim.

If they find out you sued a prior employer for discrimination and refuse to hire you on that basis, that could be illegal retaliation and you might have a claim for violation of anti-discrimination laws.

If you think any of this applies, contact an employee-side employment lawyer in your state for advice on how to proceed.

How Do I Prove Sexual Harassment?

In my 36 years of experience representing employees I’ve found that retaliation seems to be the norm rather than the exception when it comes to sexual harassment. Women (and men) are justifiably afraid to report sexual harassment. Still, sexual harassment is not about sex. It’s about power. If you don’t speak up about a sexual harasser, he or she will keep doing it and accelerate their behavior, as we've seen in some of the big celebrity cases that have come out during Me Too.

Usually, a single incident doesn’t equal a lawsuit unless it's really severe. For it to be sexual harassment under the law, the harassment must be so severe or so pervasive* that it alters the terms and conditions of your employment. Still, you aren’t helpless when it comes to sexual harassment. You can fight a sexual harasser and win. No doubt, proving sexual harassment can be difficult, because it is usually your word against the harasser’s. Still, you shouldn’t just continue to be sexually harassed without taking action. Here are some steps you can take if you’re the victim of sexual harassment at work:

Document any quid pro quo: One type of harassment is called quid pro quo sexual harassment. That’s where you are offered a job, promotion or favors if you submit to the harasser, or are threatened that you’ll be demoted, fired or disciplined if you don’t submit. If any offers or threats are being made, write down the date, time, place and any witnesses. Don’t worry if there are no witnesses. Harassers are usually too smart to do it in front of others. Your testimony is evidence. Your notes are evidence.

Document any comments and different treatment: The other type of sexual harassment is called hostile environment. That’s where you’re being harassed due to your gender. This could be comments about your gender being inferior, sexual comments, or treating people of your gender differently than the opposite sex. If the harasser is making comments or treating you differently, they may also be targeting others of your sex. Watch carefully and take good notes. Again, include date, time, place and any witnesses. If it’s just you, then still document it.

Keep your notes in a safe place: Don’t put your notes on your work computer, in a desk drawer or somewhere where the employer can take them. Keep them in your jacket pocket, purse or briefcase, or write them on your home computer. If you’re fired, they’ll prevent you from taking your notes and they may be conveniently “lost.”

Gather evidence: If the harasser is texting, emailing or sending cards or notes, keep copies. Don’t delete them. Make sure you take a screen shot of any texts and print them so you don’t lose them if your device crashes or you buy a new one. Print emails and keep them in a safe place.

Report it: You should report the sexual harassment. Make sure you’ve followed the company sexual harassment policy and reported it to the correct person. They should have alternate people to report it to in case one of them is your harasser. I suggest reporting it in writing. If you’ve only reported it verbally, follow up in writing. Something like, “This will confirm our conversation on April 15, 2023 in which I reported sexual harassment by my supervisor John Doe. I reported the following instances of sexual harassment to you: [list them]. Please take prompt action to investigate this matter and address this situation."

File with EEOC: If you’ve already reported it and they won’t take action, and your employer has at least 15 employees, then filing with the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is the next step. Filing with them is a prerequisite to filing a lawsuit for sexual harassment. Depending on your state, you have 180 or 300 days from the date of discrimination to file. You are protected from retaliation if you file a charge of discrimination with EEOC. That isn’t so say they won’t still retaliate, but if they do you can report the retaliation to EEOC and possibly sue. If your employer is too small for EEOC, some states and local governments cover smaller employers. Here in Florida, Miami-Dade, Broward, Orange, Lee, Pinellas, Hillsborough, and Palm Beach counties cover employers with 5 or more employees. You would file with the agency that covers the smaller employer in that case.

 Contact a lawyer: Contact an employment lawyer in your state who understands sexual harassment and that it is frequently your word against the harasser’s.

Get the heck out: In the meantime, if the company won’t do anything and you don’t feel safe, start looking for another job. Don’t let the harasser bully you out of a job before you’re ready, but don’t feel trapped either. Sometimes a sexual harasser will work on your head and make you feel like nobody else would want you. Don’t believe them.

Remember, sexual harassers are like rapists. It isn’t about sex – it’s about power. If nobody stops them, their behavior accelerates. If you don’t report it, there will be other victims, and the behavior will get worse. Stand up for your right to a safe workplace. Your employer has a duty to keep your workplace free of sexual harassment. It’s the law.

*Yes management side - that's an "or" not an "and" so stop saying "and" because that's just stupid. "And" would mean that the victim had to, for instance, be sexually assaulted on the reception desk by their supervisor in front of coworkers multiple times in order for it to be sexual harassment, and surely you aren't going to try to argue that one. One severe incident is enough. Multiple less severe incidents count too.

NLRB Makes Employers Liable For Damages For Direct and Foreseeable Harms

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) recently ruled that employers are liable for compensatory damages in unfair labor practices case. This means employers are now liable for direct and foreseeable harms if they break the law.  Previously, employees could only recover the loss of earnings and benefits. Now, victims of unfair labor practices may recover for other financial costs, such as out-of-pocket medical expenses, credit card debt, or other costs that are a direct or foreseeable result of the unfair labor practices. 

This new rule about compensatory damages for unfair labor practices benefits workers in several ways:

1. Increased compensation: Now workers who have been affected by unfair labor practices can receive full financial compensation to help make up for their losses. Lost wages and benefits are frequently just the beginning of the losses employees incur when employers break the law.

2. Incentive for employers to comply with labor laws: The new rule provides an incentive for employers to comply with the National Labor Relations Act. This can help to deter employers from engaging in such practices, which can benefit workers by creating a more positive and equitable workplace, or at least a place where they are not punished for getting together with coworkers to discuss working conditions.

3. Recognition of the harm caused by unfair labor practices: The new rule recognizes that unfair labor practices can cause severe harm to workers beyond lost wages and benefits, and it provides a mechanism for compensating workers for that harm. This recognition is important because it helps to validate the experiences of workers who have been affected by such practices and it helps to ensure that workers are made whole for their losses.

4. Encourages workers to report unfair labor practices: The new rule can encourage workers to report unfair labor practices, because they know that they may be entitled to compensatory damages if they are affected. This can help to increase awareness of such practices and to ensure that they are addressed, which can benefit workers by creating a safer and more equitable workplace.

5. Promotes fairness in the workplace: The new rule promotes fairness in the workplace by ensuring that workers who are affected by unfair labor practices are compensated for their losses. This can help to create a more just and equitable workplace. Employees are entitled to engage in action with coworkers to discuss working conditions and bring their concerns to managment. Employers will hopefully become more aware that there will be costly consequences of retaliating against employees who do so.

If you think your employer has violated the National Labor Relations Act, contact an employee-side employment attorney in your state to discuss your rights. If you have a union and you think your employer has violated the law, talk to your union leadership about bringing an unfair labor practices claim.


Overall, the National Labor Relations Board's new rule about compensatory damages for unfair labor practices benefits workers by increasing compensation, providing an incentive for employers to comply with labor laws, recognizing the harm caused by unfair labor practices, encouraging workers to report such practices, and promoting fairness in the workplace. By providing workers with greater protections and increased compensation, the new rule helps to create a more positive and equitable workplace for all.

Nondisparagement and Confidentiality Clauses In Severance Agreements Violate NLRA

Just about every single severance agreement I've ever seen in 36 years of law practice have two standard clauses: the former employee cannot disparage the former employer, meaning they can't say anything negative about the company or its employees and frequently to a broader list of entities; and a confidentiality clause prohibiting the former employee from telling anyone about the agreement, frequently prohibiting them from even saying it exists.

Well, the National Labor Relations Board has just ruled that both provisions are illegal under the National Labor Relations Act.

Regarding nondisparagement: 

This far-reaching proscription—which is not even limited to matters regarding past employment with the Respondent— provides no definition of disparagement that cabins that term to its well-established NLRA definition under NLRB v. Electrical Workers Local 1229 (Jefferson Standard Broadcasting Co.), supra, 346 U.S. at 477. Instead, the comprehensive ban would encompass employee conduct regarding any labor issue, dispute, or term and condition of employment of the Respondent. As we explained above, however, employee critique of employer policy pursuant to the clear right under the Act to publicize labor disputes is subject only to the requirement that employees' communications not be so “disloyal, reckless or maliciously untrue as to lose the Act's protection.” Emarco, Inc., 284 NLRB 832, 833 (1987).  

Further, the ban expansively applies to statements not only toward the Respondent but also to “its parents and affiliated entities and their officers, directors, employees, agents and representatives.” The provision further has no temporal limitation but applies “[a]t all times hereafter.” The end result is a sweepingly broad bar that has a clear chilling tendency on the exercise of Section 7 rights by the subject employee. This chilling tendency extends to efforts to assist fellow employees, which would include future cooperation with the Board’s investigation and litigation of unfair labor practices with regard to any matter arising under the NLRA at any time in the future, for fear of violating the severance agreement’s general proscription against disparagement and incurring its very significant sanctions. The same chilling tendency would extend to efforts by furloughed employees to raise or assist complaints about the Respondent with their former coworkers, the Union, the Board, any other government agency, the media, or almost anyone else. In sum, it places a broad restriction on employee protected Section 7 conduct.  We accordingly find that the proffer of the nondisparagement provision violates Section 8(a)(1) of the Act.

Our scrutiny of the confidentiality provision of the severance agreement leads to the same conclusion. The provision broadly prohibits the subject employee from disclosing the terms of the agreement “to any third person.” The employee is thus precluded from disclosing even the existence of an unlawful provision contained in the agreement. This proscription would reasonably tend to coerce the employee from filing an unfair labor practice charge or assisting a Board investigation into the Respondent’s use of the severance agreement, including the nondisparagement provision. Such a broad surrender of Section 7 rights contravenes established public policy that all persons with knowledge of unfair labor practices should be free from coercion in cooperating with the Board. The confidentiality provision has an impermissible chilling tendency on the Section 7 rights of all employees because it bars the subject employee from providing information to the Board concerning the Respondent’s unlawful interference with other employees’ statutory rights. See Metro Networks, supra, 336 NLRB at 67.

Regarding confidentiality:

The provision broadly prohibits the subject employee from disclosing the terms of the agreement “to any third person.”  The employee is thus precluded from disclosing even the existence of an unlawful provision contained in the agreement. This proscription would reasonably tend to coerce the employee from filing an unfair labor practice charge or assisting a Board investigation into the Respondent’s use of the severance agreement, including the nondisparagement provision. Such a broad surrender of Section 7 rights contravenes established public policy that all persons with knowledge of unfair labor practices should be free from coercion in cooperating with the Board.  The confidentiality provision has an impermissible chilling tendency on the Section 7 rights of all employees because it bars the subject employee from providing information to the Board concerning the Respondent’s unlawful interference with other employees’ statutory rights. See Metro Networks, supra, 336 NLRB at 67.

The confidentiality provision would also prohibit the subject employee from discussing the terms of the severance agreement with his former coworkers who could find themselves in a similar predicament facing the decision whether to accept a severance agreement. In this manner, the confidentiality provision impairs the rights of the subject employee’s former coworkers to call upon him for support in comparable circumstances. Additionally encompassed by the confidentiality provision is discussion with the Union concerning the terms of the agreement, or such discussion with a union representing employees where the subject employee may gain subsequent employment, or alternatively seek to participate in organizing, or discussion with future co-workers.  A severance agreement is unlawful if it precludes an employee from assisting coworkers with workplace issues concerning their employer, and from communicating with others, including a union, and the Board, about his employment. Id. Conditioning the benefits under a severance agreement on the forfeiture of statutory rights plainly has a reasonable tendency to interfere with, restrain, or coerce the exercise of those rights unless it is narrowly tailored to respect the range of those rights. Our review of the agreement here plainly shows that not to be the case. We accordingly find that the proffer of the confidentiality provision violates Section 8(a)(1) of the Act. 

So, is this a magic wand? Did such provisions suddenly go poof? No. Management side will fight this decision like cornered rats. Still, keep an eye out for further developments. In the meantime, you might want to file with NLRB if your employer presents you with any such provisions in a proposed severance agreement.

NLRB Proposed Joint Employer Rule Would Help Workers

Last year, the National Labor Relations Board proposed a new rule that would change how it decides who is an employer. Under the proposed rule announced September 6, 2022, two or more employers would be considered joint employers if they “share or codetermine those matters governing employees’ essential terms and conditions of employment,” such as wages, benefits and other compensation, work and scheduling, hiring and discharge, discipline, workplace health and safety, supervision, assignment, and work rules. The comment period ended in December, so we can expect the new rule to arrive any time now.

To put it simply, when two employers are connected in some way, they become joint employers and they both have responsibility for their workers. It's like when two people get married, they both have responsibilities for each other and their life together.

It's important because it means that workers have more protections and can hold both employers accountable for things like unionizing and unfair labor practices.

The new joint employer rule will have many benefits for employees. Here are some of the most significant ways that employees can benefit from this rule:

1. Greater protections against retaliation: When an employee is jointly employed by two employers, they are protected by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) against retaliation from either employer. This means that if an employee engages in protected concerted activity, such as organizing a union, discussing wages, or discussing working conditions, they cannot be fired or otherwise punished by either employer.

2. More bargaining power: When employees are jointly employed by two employers, they can bargain with both employers for better wages, benefits, and working conditions. This gives employees more bargaining power and ability to unionize than they would have if they were only employed by one employer. The possibility of NLRB sanctions will hopefully make smaller employers think twice about engaging in unfair labor practices.

3. More coverage: If one employer does not fall under the NLRB's jurisdiction because it has too little income or does not meet other jurisdictional standards, combining two employers will make it easier to bring the company under the umbrella of the National Labor Relations Act.

4. Better wages and working conditions: Ultimately, the ability to bargain collectively will help increase wages and improve overall working conditions for employees.

Overall, the National Labor Relations Board's joint employer rule benefits employees by providing greater protections, improved working conditions, and more bargaining power. By holding both employers accountable, employees are more likely to have a voice in the workplace and to receive fair treatment.

Needless to say, managment-side is howling about the possibility of this rule going into effect. They are crying gloom and doom and predict business armageddon. I suspect that this NLRB won't accede to their demands and that this rule or something quite similar will be the final rule that is implemented this year.   

SNL's "It's Pat" Shows How Easy It Is To Respect Nonbinary Coworkers

 With all the anti-trans stuff coming out of the GOP, and especially Florida, I started thinking about an old Saturday Night live sketch, “It’s Pat.” And when I first thought about it, I thought it might be considered offensive to nonbinary people now. But then it occurred to me that the sketch actually shows how easy it is to respect the pronouns of nonbinary workers. The sketch features a character named Pat, whose gender is not specified or obvious, and is played by Julia Sweeney.

The other characters in the sketch are confused about which pronouns (either "he" or "she") and other gender-specific terms to use to refer to Pat, so they avoid using gender-specific language. For instance, on Pat’s birthday they start to sing, “For he’s/she’s a jolly good fellow,” but after a mixture of choices they settle on, “For Pat’s a jolly good person.” Pat’s coworkers ultimately refer to Pat as “they/them” in order not to misgender Pat. They did this naturally, if a little awkwardly, before the use of neutral pronouns became both common and a political football.

The sketch is meant to be humorous, but it also demonstrates both the ease of using the correct pronouns for nonbinary workers, and how we used to have more respect for our fellow humans. Nowadays, the right would probably say the sketch is too "woke" and claim offense of the use of neutral language. Using the correct pronouns is a basic form of respect and helps to create an inclusive and welcoming workplace for all employees. This sketch shows that it is not difficult to respect the pronouns of nonbinary workers and that everyone can do it with a little effort and awareness.

Like with the coworkers in “It’s Pat,” sometimes neutral language and pronouns can be confusing at first. But with a little effort and respect, it is actually pretty easy. If you make a mistake, just correct it. Deliberately misgendering people is cruel and disrespectful.

By demonstrating the ease of using the correct pronouns, the sketch should encourage everyone to make an effort to be more inclusive and respectful in their interactions with nonbinary coworkers.