Government Cracking Down on Agreements Between Competitors Not to Solicit Each Other's Employees
Hinshaw Alert
Hinshaw Alert | 1 min read
Jan 4, 2011
Many companies include anti-pirating provisions in their employment agreements, whereby the employee agrees that upon leaving the company, he or she will not solicit for employment or hire the former employer’s employees on behalf of any other entity. A variation is an agreement between competing companies to refrain from soliciting or hiring each other’s employees. These agreements recently have attracted the attention of U.S. antitrust regulators.
The U.S. Department of Justice’s (DOJ’s) Antitrust Division charged Lucasfilm with conspiring to violate Section 1 of the Sherman Act by agreeing with Pixar that neither would “cold call” the employees of the other and that each would notify the other when making an offer to the other’s employee. The DOJ charged that the agreement reduced competition by limiting recruitment and movement of highly specialized digital animation workers and preventing employees from achieving higher compensation.
Lucasfilm has agreed to a consent decree which prohibits it from entering into, maintaining or enforcing any agreement that prevents it from soliciting, cold calling, recruiting or otherwise competing for employees. An earlier consent decree imposed similar restrictions on Pixar and other high-tech companies, including Adobe, Apple, Google, Intel and Intuit.
Employers should be aware that the DOJ and the U.S. Federal Trade Commission, which also enforces federal antitrust laws, are looking to prevent agreements between competitors which limit competition for employees. These agencies also continue to engage in traditional enforcement efforts against agreements which limit competition for customers or otherwise tend to increase prices.
For further information, please contact your regular Hinshaw attorney.
This alert has been prepared by Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP to provide information on recent legal developments of interest to our readers. It is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship.
Featured Insights

Employment Law Observer
Aug 10, 2026
As Leaves Fall, Leave Requests Rise: Are You Compliant With Chicago’s Expanded Rules?

Press Release
Aug 7, 2026
Daniel McGrath Re-Elected Senior Director of the Federation of Defense & Corporate Counsel

Insights for Insurers Alert
Aug 7, 2026
California Supreme Court Clarifies Pleading Standards for Excess Policy Claims

Press Release
Aug 6, 2026
Charles Townsend Named a Best Mentor Finalist in the 2026 ALM Texas Legal Awards

Webinar
Aug 5, 2026
April Toy Moderates HNBA Webinar on AI in the Practice of Law

Privacy, Cyber & AI Decoded Alert
Aug 5, 2026
2026 AI Compliance: Upcoming Laws Every Organization Needs to Know

Press Release
July 21, 2026 | Updated on August 4, 2026
Three Hinshaw Attorneys Named to the 2026 National Black Lawyers’ Top 40 Under 40 List

Healthcare Alert
Aug 3, 2026
Fixing the Emergency Refill Trap: What California’s AB 1587 Means for Pharmacies

Consumer Crossroads: Where Financial Services and Litigation Intersect
Jul 30, 2026
Should Text Messages be Considered “Calls” Under the TCPA? The Seventh Circuit Says No

Healthcare Alert
Jul 30, 2026
California Courts Sharply Curtail the MICRA Damages Cap in Nursing Home Litigation

Insights for Insurers Alert
Jul 30, 2026
Analyzing a Couple of Cases Involving Exclusions in D&O Policies

