, as well as certain “de facto” noncompetes like TRAPs “where the required payment is not reasonably related to the costs the employer incurred for training the worker.”
Unfortunately for workers, however, the FTC’s proposed rule leaves a gaping loophole that will encourage employers to simply switch from traditional noncompetes to TRAPs. Employers can easily fabricate a justification for their training, as demonstrated in Van Briggle’s case.
Nevertheless, the training was of little value to Van Briggle, discouraged workers from improving working conditions, and economically locked Van Briggle into the job. If TRAPs proliferate due to this loophole, we can expect more stories like Van Briggle’s. TRAPs are often more harmful than traditional noncompetes. Because TRAPs force workers to pay even if they do not work for a competitor, many workers could actually be worse off than under traditional noncompete agreements.
that employers began offloading training costs onto workers by requiring more applicants to hold college degrees and by paying subminimum wages, or no wages, during training periods. TRAPs are just the latest version of this cost offloading.