Affiliation:
1. Department of Management Syracuse University Syracuse New York USA
2. Department of Management and Organization University of Maryland College Park Maryland USA
3. Department of Management and Human Resources University of Wisconsin Madison Wisconsin USA
Abstract
AbstractResearch SummaryWe examine the joint adoption of four employment restrictions that limit firm resource outflows—nondisclosure (NDA), non‐solicitation, non‐recruitment, and noncompete agreements—and their associations with value appropriation from employees. Using novel individual‐ and firm‐level survey data, we find that when firms adopt restrictions, they tend to adopt either all four restrictions or only an NDA. Adoption of all four restrictions is more likely when workers have access to valuable resources, noncompetes are more enforceable, and states adopt the inevitable disclosure doctrine. Employees with all four restrictions earn 5.4% less than employees with only NDAs, and this effect is driven by workers with low bargaining power. Analyses of earnings and a single restriction (e.g., only noncompetes) yield opposite results from those considering joint adoption, likely because of selection.Managerial SummaryValuable firm resources are often embedded in employees. We study whether and when firms adopt four employment restrictions that could protect such resources—agreements not to disclose information, not to solicit clients or coworkers, and not to join or start a competitor—and examine the extent to which they are associated with value capture from employees. Using novel firm and worker‐level surveys, we find that firms mostly adopt either all four restrictions together, only an NDA, or use no restrictions. Workers are more likely to have all four restrictions when they have access to valuable resources, when noncompetes are more enforceable, and when states adopt the inevitable disclosure doctrine. Finally, all four restrictions are associated with 5.4% lower earnings on average relative to workers with only an NDA, driven by workers with low‐bargaining power.
Reference76 articles.
1. Cubewrap contracts and worker mobility: The dilution of employee bargaining power via standard form noncompetes;Arnow‐Richman R.;Michigan State Law Review,2006
2. Supporting market accountability, workplace equity, and fair competition by reining in non‐disclosure agreements;Arnow‐Richman R. S.;Day One Project,2022
3. Labor noncompete agreements: Tool for economic efficiency or means to extract value from workers?;Balan D. J.;The Antitrust Bulletin,2021
4. Locked in? The enforceability of covenants not to compete and the careers of high‐tech employees;Balasubramanian N.;Journal of Human Resources,2020
5. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage;Barney J.;Journal of Management,1991
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献