Franchise “No-Poach” Antitrust Litigation
Have you worked at any of the following franchises within the last four years?
- Dunkin’ Donuts
- Burger King
- Little Caesars
- McDonald’s – California ONLY
If so, you may have been illegally underpaid. Please fill out the form on this page—you may be able to file a class action lawsuit.
If you worked at any of the companies listed above within the last four years and are interested in discussing a possible case, please contact Michael Dell’Angelo at firstname.lastname@example.org or 215.875.3080.
About the case
The franchises listed above have all adopted restrictive agreements between the companies and their franchise owners called “no-poach” agreements. These agreements prevent franchise owners from recruiting employees from other same-chain locations.
For example, a UPS Store employee who works in Pennsylvania would not be allowed to accept a job offer from another UPS Store in New Jersey. These “no-poach” agreements hurt employees and limit their ability to get better, high-paying jobs.
Berger Montague is investigating potential nationwide antitrust class action claims against franchises that use “no-poach” agreements on behalf of the franchises’ current and former employees. If you worked for any of the franchises listed above within the last four years, you may be eligible to join the litigation.
Have other “no-poach” agreement lawsuits been filed? Yes.
Recently, the attorneys general of 10 states and the District of Columbia launched an investigation into the “no-poach” agreements used by Arby’s, Burger King, Dunkin’ Donuts, Five Guys, Little Caesars, Panera Bread, Popeyes, and Wendy’s. Click here for more information about the investigation.
“No-poach” agreements in the fast food industry have been the subject of articles in The New York Times, The Washington Post, and numerous other publications. Berger Montague believes that other franchises may be using “no-poach” agreements as well.
What are “no-poach” agreements?
“No-poach” agreements are deals made between business owners stating that they will not “poach” (aka recruit and/or hire) each other’s employees. These may be written agreements, or they could simply be verbal agreements. Employers enter into them to keep their employees’ wages low, saving the company money.
However, “no-poach” agreements are illegal, and there are state and federal antitrust laws in place to prevent them. If you are employed by a company that is engaged in “no-poach” behavior, you may be illegally underpaid.
Do I have to pay to consult with an attorney?
We are happy to talk with you about your potential claims free of charge. If we decide to represent you in a lawsuit, we will enter into a written contingent fee agreement with you. A contingent fee agreement means we only get paid if we win, and we will receive our fees from the amount paid by the Defendant in the case.
About Berger Montague
Berger Montague is a full-spectrum class action and complex civil litigation firm. The firm has been recognized by courts throughout the country for its ability and experience in handling major complex litigation.
Berger Montague attorneys have litigated several employee antitrust cases involving employee hiring restrictions similar to the ones that have been adopted by franchises, including a nationwide class action brought on behalf of employees in the tech industry (In re High Tech Employee Antitrust Litigation), and another brought on behalf of all rail equipment manufacturer employees (Lucas v. Knorr-Bremse AG). Past results cannot be an assurance of future success in any given case, because each matter must be decided on its own merit.