Video: Every Case Tells a Story| Webinar: ACR/CHEST ILD Guidelines in Practice

An official publication of the ACR and the ARP serving rheumatologists and rheumatology professionals

  • Conditions
    • Axial Spondyloarthritis
    • Gout and Crystalline Arthritis
    • Myositis
    • Osteoarthritis and Bone Disorders
    • Pain Syndromes
    • Pediatric Conditions
    • Psoriatic Arthritis
    • Rheumatoid Arthritis
    • Sjögren’s Disease
    • Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
    • Systemic Sclerosis
    • Vasculitis
    • Other Rheumatic Conditions
  • FocusRheum
    • ANCA-Associated Vasculitis
    • Axial Spondyloarthritis
    • Gout
    • Psoriatic Arthritis
    • Rheumatoid Arthritis
    • Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
  • Guidance
    • Clinical Criteria/Guidelines
    • Ethics
    • Legal Updates
    • Legislation & Advocacy
    • Meeting Reports
      • ACR Convergence
      • Other ACR meetings
      • EULAR/Other
    • Research Rheum
  • Drug Updates
    • Analgesics
    • Biologics/DMARDs
  • Practice Support
    • Billing/Coding
    • EMRs
    • Facility
    • Insurance
    • QA/QI
    • Technology
    • Workforce
  • Opinion
    • Patient Perspective
    • Profiles
    • Rheuminations
      • Video
    • Speak Out Rheum
  • Career
    • ACR ExamRheum
    • Awards
    • Career Development
  • ACR
    • ACR Home
    • ACR Convergence
    • ACR Guidelines
    • Journals
      • ACR Open Rheumatology
      • Arthritis & Rheumatology
      • Arthritis Care & Research
    • From the College
    • Events/CME
    • President’s Perspective
  • Search

Status Check: Non-Compete Agreements in Healthcare

Emily A. Johnson, JD  |  Issue: October 2024  |  October 7, 2024

Physicians are often frustrated by government rulings that affect their ability to run their practices and treat their patients. Typically, the agency responsible for stirring the pot is the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. However, another agency recently caught the attention of physicians nationwide—the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).

On April 23, 2024, the FTC issued a final rule banning non-competition agreements. After months on a rollercoaster of litigation and uncertainty, the FTC Final Rule was halted by a federal court in Texas, in the form of a nationwide injunction. Now the question looms: What does this mean for current and future physician non-competes?

ad goes here:advert-1
ADVERTISEMENT
SCROLL TO CONTINUE

The FTC Final Rule shook employers across all industries because non-competes have become a ubiquitous tool used to protect business plans from disruption. Non-compete provisions, stating the worker may not engage in a similar business within a certain area for a certain time period after they have terminated employment from their current job, are often incorporated into employment agreements.

On the one hand, the value of a non-compete is obvious: Employers invest many hours and resources into their workers, so they don’t want that worker to simply set up shop nearby and compete with them directly. On the other hand, non-competes can become burdensome to the worker, forcing them to stay with a company because they don’t have viable options to work elsewhere.

ad goes here:advert-2
ADVERTISEMENT
SCROLL TO CONTINUE

Non-competes have historically had varying degrees of enforcement. Certain states have restricted the area within which a non-compete may be enforceable or the length of time for which a non-compete can be enforced. For professional services like physician services, non-competes can be restricted due to the fact that an overly broad non-compete could endanger a community by cutting off access to adequate medical services.

What Did the FTC Final Rule State?

If enacted as planned on Sept. 4, 2024, almost all existing non-competes would have been invalidated for workers at for-profit entities. The definition of “workers” under the FTC Rule is not limited to employees, but includes other individuals who provide services for healthcare entities, such as independent contractors, interns and volunteers.

As the FTC Final Rule was written, employers were required to provide a notice to all current and former workers who have a non-compete, stating their non-compete would not be enforced. Employers were encouraged to review their worker census and list of terminated workers to determine to whom they were required to give this notice.

Page: 1 2 3 | Single Page
Share: 

Filed under:CareerLegal Updates Tagged with:employee agreementLegalnon-compete

Related Articles

    FTC Bans Noncompete Agreements: What Rheumatologists Need to Know

    May 5, 2024

    The ACR applauds the FTC’s recent ban on most noncompete agreements. The ruling is a step in the right direction toward a more competitive market for healthcare workers and their services.

    Employee Non-Compete Agreements in Physician Practices

    November 16, 2016

    You started a medical practice and, through the years, have developed policies, procedures, strategies, work products, client relationships and confidential information that are specific to your practice and its success. As your practice grows, you know you will need to hire more employees. You also understand, however, that any potential employee may pose a risk…

    Department of Health and Human Services’ Final Rule Expands HIPAA Obligations, Violation Penalties

    April 1, 2013

    Physicians’ business associates can now face civil and criminal penalties for violating HIPAA laws guarding the confidentiality of protected health information

    Florida Law Puts Drug Pricing by Pharmacy Benefit Managers Under a Microscope Once Again

    August 8, 2022

    As of July 1, a Florida bill increases oversight of pharmacy benefit managers and offers some protection for pharmacies. However, the legislation has limited effects on patients and providers, highlighting the need for additional reform.

  • About Us
  • Meet the Editors
  • Issue Archives
  • Contribute
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us
  • Copyright © 2025 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 1931-3268 (print). ISSN 1931-3209 (online).
  • DEI Statement
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookie Preferences