Deborah Kurtz’s Post

Boston Beer Co., the brewer of Sam Adams and other craft beverages, is taking heat for its overuse of noncompete agreements. In a recent article, the Boston Globe cites examples of several former lower-level Boston Beer employees forced out of the industry they love because of the noncompete agreements their former employer forced them to sign at their time of hire. Legally speaking, to be enforceable a post-employment restrictive covenant must be narrowly tailored by time, geography, and a reasonable business interest worthy of protection. Yet, like the Boston Beer example, all too often employers require many too many employees to sign overly broad and overly restrictive agreements. It’s bullying and a scare tactic. It’s also legally unsupportable. And it’s also why the federal government and many states are looking at regulatory and legislative solutions to limit their use. Employers should not wait for the government to tell them what to do here. Instead, I suggest that employers deploy commonsense discretion with a tiered approach to the use of post-employment restrictive covenants: Tier 1: Are you worried about protecting confidential information? In that case, maybe a non-disclosure agreement is all you need. Tier 2: Are you worried about an employee poaching your customers, employees, or vendors? Then a non-solicit is in order (plus the non-disclosure). Tier 3: Is what an employee provides so unique in nature that you genuinely will be irreparably harmed by the employee jumping to a competitor? Then, and only then, is a broad non-competition agreement called for (plus the non-disclosure and non-solicit). In other words, narrowly tailor your restrictive-covenant agreements to the specific interest(s) you are trying to protect. And, if you don’t have such an interest, forego the agreement altogether for that employee or group of employees. Otherwise, you will spend oodles of money attempting to enforce an unenforceable agreement. While that strategy is great for me, it’s terrible for your business, which should be in the business of making money, not throwing it away chasing a fool’s errand or bullying your employees.

Last month I posted a very spicy take on The Boston Beer Company's non-compete practices. The post drew immediate attention, but I deleted it soon after. The post wasn't well thought out, it was written from a place of anger. I have watched peers suffer under these agreements, expressing fear of leaving a company they no longer want to work for but worrying they won't be able to take their next great job. I have seen the emails received when folks finally cut the cord - fancy attorneys representing one of the most powerful alcohol companies in the US directly intimidating them when they pose no threat to their business. I have seen good people turn down great opportunities out of fear. In most cases, non-competes are entirely unenforceable. Boston Beer knows this, but they also know that their targets - their former employees - don't have the resources to retain decent counsel and get in front of a judge. They catch them, by design, at a moment when they are the most sensitive: in transition from one job to the next. Knowing the bill is high and that time is on their side, BB uses their might to suppress good people's future by emotionally crushing them at a vulnerable time. In my opinion, they do so because they're aware of just how many employees would hit the eject button if they felt like they could do so safely. That terrifies them - and it artificially props up their performance, their stock price, and their image in our industry. The achilles heel comes when companies like ours understand that footing the bill for defense against exploitative corporate greed is a small price to pay for great talent. You'll never see a non-compete here - but I have a feeling you'll see plenty of incredible people stick around for the long haul.

Meals for people who are out of the office can be reimbursed or paid for… But what about tea, coffee, and their essential winter accompaniment – the biscuit? Good news – the biscuits are covered! Tea, coffee, and your favourite baked dipping treat are tax-free and expected by most employees. But this is where it can get interesting. Did you know that the company can install a good old-fashioned canteen and provide meals, tax-and NI contribution free? It’s true. In fact, you don’t need a canteen – if the company shouts everyone lunch on the premises and it’s on a reasonable scale… It’s tax-free. HMRC is particularly vague about this too, which is a good thing for you. You can have paid-for lunch for everyone every day of the year if you like, and you won’t face any awkward questions unless there is clear evidence that you’re overdoing it. Team lunch anyone!? #Meals #Team

"No taxation without representation" is a fundamental right, unless in California you're: 1) an independent restaurant operator; a 2) company-owned restaurant group; or 3) a restaurant franchisor. Although AB 1228 (aka "The Fast Act"), which goes into effect April 1, will in one way or another "tax" all restaurants doing business the golden state, none of the aforementioned have representation on the newly-appointed "Fast Food Council" (link to article below). This omission leaves a massive number of important restaurant voices silent and without input on critical matters that will further impact business, jobs and customers. What do these unrepresented voices represent in California? Literally, over a million jobs, tens of billions of dollars in revenue, and many of the most inspiring and exciting employers and brands in the industry. To keep California in its rightful place as one of the greatest restaurant markets in the world, the "Fast Food Council" needs members from these unrepresented categories. This will help ensure that decisions and recommendations that impact restaurants, employees, and guests are better informed than under the current structure. Governor Gavin Newsom, please give consideration to expanding the Council to give these important voices a seat at the table. https://lnkd.in/gki25bBC

Consider the example of a chef who, reluctant to share recipes with an underling, insisted on doing all the work themselves. If the chef did share their recipes, what’s to prevent the worker from taking that knowledge to a new restaurant? Noncompetes address that problem by banning the observable, detectable action of going to work at a similar firm. This has made noncompetes a very desirable tool for companies where the so-called “secret sauce” involves particularly sensitive information or distinctive practices. And in the absence of noncompetes, companies may be far less willing to share knowledge with their workers. This will come at a cost to the companies, of course. But it could also come at a cost to workers, limiting their on-the-job training. “Banning them will tend to make workers less productive,” Hubbard says, “because people aren’t going to tell them much, which would ultimately hurt their earning potential.”

Great article from Kate Bernot! Appreciate the opportunity to share some thoughts on the the #beerindustry and how, working together, all can succeed. Great insight from Jessica Hart, MBA and Caroline O'Connell too!

A pivotal moment has arrived in the industry with the recent House vote on the Joint Employer Rule. Join the conversation and stay informed about this critical development that could impact the industry. Read, engage, and share your insights! #RestaurantIndustry #BusinessInsights #SavorFM #JointEmployerRule 🍽️ https://lnkd.in/eicMyeZJ

https://lnkd.in/edSC9zi8 UK laws are changing in relation to how Tips and service charges are handled: The key points of the legislation and code of practice are as follows: - Employers must pass on 100% of tips and service charges to their teams. - Tips that are outside the scope of the legislation are those where the employer has no oversight of the transaction or distribution. - All funds must be distributed to employees by the end of the month following their receipt. - Hospitality operators are required to have a written policy detailing how tips are accepted and distributed, which must be made available to all team members. - Policies should be agreed upon with teams and must be ‘fair’. - Agency workers are entitled to a proportion of tips. Once tips are passed on to the agency that provided the worker, the agency is legally responsible for ensuring the money reaches the worker in full. - Service charges received at one site within a group cannot be combined with those generated at another site and can only be shared among employees who worked at that site. However, those working in non-public business areas (e.g., head office) may receive funds. - Employers must keep records, which employees have the right to view upon request (up to one request every three months). - The act grants staff members and agency workers the right to take complaints about tips to an employment tribunal. #Legislation #CodeOfPractice #EmploymentLaw #TipsAndServiceCharge #EmployeeRights #HospitalityIndustry #FairWork #AgencyWorkers #WorkplacePolicy #EmploymentTribunal #EmployeeEntitlements #WorkplaceFairness #CaptivateCulinaryConnections

Does anything beat that morning cup of tea? 😍 Are you Team Barry’s or Team Lyons? ☕️ Let’s be honest, there’s only one right answer—Team Barry’s! That rich flavor, the iconic red box... it’s the premium choice all the way....no contest💃. Speaking of premium and red🤔 Just like Barry’s, we’re all about quality. We’re here to make life easier for both contractors and recruiters—whether it’s quick set up, maximising your take-home pay, handling all that tax stuff, or making sure you’re fully compliant, we’ve got it covered!🤝 So, if you’re looking for the best cup of tea, it’s gotta be Barry’s—and when it comes to contracting, it’s gotta be Contracting PLUS 🙌. #TeamBarrys #TeamContractingPLUS #PremiumService #ChooseRed #ChoosePremium