Antipoaching

Not to be confused with Anti-poaching.

Antipoaching (or no-poach agreement) is an anti-competitive conduct where companies conspire not to hire each other's employees.^[1]

Antipoaching agreements, or no-poach agreements, are related to non-compete clauses, but distinct -- no-poach agreements are among employers, non-compete clauses are between employer and company. In the United States, antipoaching agreements have been widespread among franchise businesses: Research has found that 58 percent of major franchisors' contracts in 2016, including those of McDonald's, Burger King, Jiffy Lube, and H&R Block, contained agreements not to hire the workers of other franchisees.^[2] Some franchisors have since stated that they would drop those agreements.^[3]

Antipoaching agreements may be illegal under U.S. antitrust law in some circumstances.^[4] Major high-tech companies in the United States, such as Adobe, Apple, Intuit, Intel, eBay, Google, LucasFilm and Pixel, entered into at least one no-poach agreement. These firms reportedly engaged in the following behaviors: "Managers informed recruiters which potential hires were off-limits and some human resources departments maintained written lists. Some agreements included additional anticompetitive restraints, such as prohibition of bidding wars. Enforcement was straightforward. In cases where a firm violated an agreement, its counterparty often contacted a senior manager at the violating firm, who would then put a stop to the violation." These tech firms were the basis of the High-Tech Employee Antitrust Litigation. A 2025 study found that this collusion reduced wages at the colluding firms by 5.6%, reduced stock bonuses for employees, and led to worse job satisfaction.^[5]

See also

• Employee poaching
• High-Tech Employee Antitrust Litigation
• Non-compete clause
• Market power