• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

FTC votes to ban non competes. How will this affect LA radio and on air personality?

Me personally I think it's a good move because why have a DJ sit out 5 or 6 months knowing another broadcaster will potentially want that dj. I think it's a silly move and I'm glad FCC is banning it
 
30james said:
Yep read it on radio insight here is the article. What does everyone think? Is this good or bad move made by the FCC

radioinsight.com

Federal Trade Commission Votes To Ban Non-Compete Agreements

The Federal Trade Commission voted today by a 3-2 margin to ban non-compete agreements in contracts. Under the new rule,
radioinsight.com radioinsight.com
Click to expand...

Good move. Should never have applied to talent in the first place.

We had them in Phoenix and (after many years) got them repealed. During the time we had them, I was entertaining an offer from a station in San Diego. I asked the News Director about non-competes.

His answer:

"We don't have any. If we're dumb enough to let you go and you're still of value in the market, that's on us."
 
Last edited:
michael hagerty said:
Good move. Should never have applied to talent in the first place.

We had them in Phoenix and (after many years) got them repealed. During the time we had them, I was entertaining an offer from a station in San Diego. I asked the News Director about non-competes.

His answer:

"We don't have any. If we're dumb enough to let you go and you're still of value in the market, that's on us."
Click to expand...
That is the guy you want to work for.
 
30james said:
Does anyone know how this will affect on air personalities? Here in LA?
Click to expand...

There’s not a lot of turnover, nor are there many stations to jump to that aren’t owned by the same company.

I mean, if KRRL dumped Big Boy or his contract expired and he wanted to go back to Power (just an example), he could go the day he was free instead of sitting out for six months.

This would have had a lot more impact decades ago.

And just so no one misunderstands, this law won’t void a contract. If you’re signed with K-Whatever through 2029, that’s unchanged.

What this does is eliminate K-Whatever’s ability to keep you from working on-air in the same market for a given period (usually six months) after you leave them.
 
30james said:
Me personally I think it's a good move because why have a DJ sit out 5 or 6 months knowing another broadcaster will potentially want that dj. I think it's a silly move and I'm glad FCC is banning it
Click to expand...
Are there still some exceptions under new FTC rules? For instance the dissolution of partnerships or sale of business? I didn't catch it in the article although it may be in there.
 
BLA said:
Are there still some exceptions under new FTC rules?
Click to expand...
The main exception to the new FTC policy is that it does not apply to not-for-profit employers, such as hospitals, schools and local units of government. Although historically non-competes have been less common in that sector, they do happen.

But again, the FTC policy does not replace California law. As far as I understand, California law does apply to not-for-profits.
 
michael hagerty said:
You’re absolutely right. Wish I had. I chose to re-up for another three years (which turned into 12) in Phoenix.
Click to expand...
Of course, there was always the risk that he would have been replaced at some point in the future by someone who would have taken a different view of the matter.
 
Michael----Did you and Charlie Van Dyke ever work simultaneously at any radio station (or stations) here in Phoenix?
 
Marv said:
Michael----Did you and Charlie Van Dyke ever work simultaneously at any radio station (or stations) here in Phoenix?
Click to expand...
Yes. KGLQ-FM The Eagle. It was owned by Nationwide at the time. Fantastic Classic Hits station when nobody else was doing it. Really good station that was way ahead of it's time, unfortunately.
I believe it was bought up by Jacor or Clear Channel and flipped to Hot AC.
 
henry said:
As nice as it has been having non-competes illegal in California, it really was never about broadcast non-competes. All for the tech sector. And frankly a contributing factor to how tech is so vibrant in CA.
Click to expand...
Tech will just continue to demand NDA's from their workers. Some of those NDA's run for years, not just six months.
 
Marv said:
Michael----Did you and Charlie Van Dyke ever work simultaneously at any radio station (or stations) here in Phoenix?
Click to expand...
Marv—-checking in over coffee in Venice (the other one).

Yes, as OldYeller notes, Charlie and I did mornings together at KGLQ in the fall of 1997. Nationwide had just bought the station from Bonneville. We took the morning show from 29th in the demo to 9th in one book, had a big celebration, and the next week learned Nationwide was selling all its stations to Jacor.

I think we had four months on-air together in what’s now a 30-year friendship.

About three years later, KTAR asked Charlie and me to do a one-shot weekend show (Charles Goyette had just jumped ship to KFYI).

We had fun, and KTAR offered us the slot. Charlie didn’t want to commit to working weekends, and to my surprise, KTAR asked if I’d like to do it as a solo. That turned into four very good years.
 
PTBoardOp93 said:
Minimally, because most non-competes were already not recognized under California law.
Click to expand...
Exactly. In many states, non-competes are unenforceable anyway. Plus, considering Radio has been laying people off in the name of automation and cost-cutting for 20 years, it would do the companies a disservice to actually try to sue a fired news reporter or DJ who was making maybe between $50-100K, to keep them out of work for 6 months to a year. The cost of doing that would defeat their purpose of saving that money in the first place.
 
RayydioLA said:
Exactly. In many states, non-competes are unenforceable anyway. Plus, considering Radio has been laying people off in the name of automation and cost-cutting for 20 years, it would do the companies a disservice to actually try to sue a fired news reporter or DJ who was making maybe between $50-100K, to keep them out of work for 6 months to a year. The cost of doing that would defeat their purpose of saving that money in the first place.
Click to expand...
Non-competes were designed to keep expensive talent in major markets from walking across the street to the competition. It's never been a real thing in markets that would pay talent $50-100K. You're right that an employer wouldn't have wanted to pay legal fees to file suit against someone at that level.
In that role, I would have been pleased to sign a non-compete if my employer would agree to pay my full salary plus benefits in a guaranteed severance package for one full year while I waited out a six-month non-compete.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom