Tuesday, May 11, 2021
1. Introduction
Labor market concentration and its potential effects on workers is a topic increasingly debated among antitrust practitioners and academics. The potential link between labor market concentration and lower wages has led to questions of whether and how labor issues should inform merger review and, more broadly, antitrust investigations. Covid-19 has strained some industries (such as airlines) and may result in consolidation of some employers, further raising labor market concentration concerns. This article describes some of the current research regarding labor concentration and its impact on workers, how labor concentration issues are being raised in the courts, and how economic analysis can inform antitrust inquiry moving forward.
To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog:
The Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division (DOJ) has once again indicted health care individuals and a health care company for violations of Section 1 of the Sherman Act. On March 30, 2021, the DOJ indicted a Regional Manager (
United States v. Hee et al., Case No. 2:21-cr-00098-RFB-BNW (D. Nev.)), who was responsible for managing the office’s hiring of nurses and developing new customers that needed nurse staffing services in Nevada, Arizona, and Utah, as well as competing companies.
Pharma companies, as well as health care companies, should be aware of this indictment because the DOJ continues to pursue Wage Fixing and No-Poaching Agreement cases in the health care area.
Wednesday, February 10, 2021
Two recent federal criminal indictments have captured the attention of both antitrust and employment lawyers, as well as the legal and business community nationwide. The cases – both in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas – demonstrate that the U.S. Department of Justice is escalating its focus on so-called wage-fixing and no-poach agreements. This is an important development to be aware of because (1) the Department of Justice treats wage-fixing and no-poach agreements as per se illegal, meaning that they violate the law regardless of whether there is any anti-competitive effect, and (2) companies may be held liable for these agreements even if they are formed between lower-level employees.
Tuesday, January 26, 2021
More than four years after first announcing its intent to criminally prosecute employers and individuals who enter into naked wage-fixing or no-poaching agreements with other employers,
1 the Department of Justice Antitrust Division (Antitrust Division) recently brought its first-ever criminal charges in two different cases for alleged anticompetitive conduct in labor markets. With these two criminal actions, it is clear that DOJ’s public promises to prosecute anticompetitive conduct affecting U.S. labor markets were not just empty threats. Such charges highlight the criminal risks now associated with agreements between labor market competitors related to hiring, wages, and other terms of employment. Below we:
Tuesday, December 29, 2020
Earlier this month, the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) announced that a federal grand jury in Texas indicted Neeraj Jindal, the former owner of a physical therapist staffing company, in connection with an illegal wage-fixing conspiracy to depress pay rates for physical therapists (“PTs”) and physical therapist assistants (“PTAs”) who travel to patients’ homes or assisted living facilities in the greater Dallas-Fort Worth area. The indictment was something of a landmark for the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”), which for years had promised that such criminal prosecutions were forthcoming in connection with its ongoing investigations of illegal no-poach and wage-fixing agreements by employers.