DOJ, State AGs Join Forces to Reinstate Suit Against Designers & Saks Fifth Avenue
The U.S. Justice Department and 21 state attorneys general have teamed up to attempt to reinstate a lawsuit claiming that Saks Fifth Avenue and high-end luxury designers such as Louis Vuitton USA, Gucci America and Prada USA were engaging in a conspiracy to suppress retail employee mobility.
According to the proposed class action, the designers agreed not to hire Saks employees for at least six months and the plaintiffs allege Saks suppressed their wages. The defendants deny the allegations.
Read more: Antitrust Class Action Against Luxury Designers Is Dismissed
Chief U.S. District Judge Margo Brodie dismissed the workers’ case after finding that the claims from three former employees at Saks fell outside the four-year window to file an antitrust lawsuit. In the Justice Department’s brief, they stated that “Brodie misapplied the law on the applicable statute of limitations” and that “her ruling, if it is left in place, ‘risks preventing recovery in damages suits when conspiracies last longer than four years.”
California Attorney General Rob Bonta weighed in on the topic, stating “No-hire agreements are anti-worker and anticompetitive. They have no place in the labor market.” Attorney for the plaintiffs, Joseph Saveri, added that “There’s probably nothing more fundamental to a person than to be fairly compensated for his or her skills and values.”
The plaintiffs have sought unspecified monetary damages and an injunction barring enforcement of alleged no-poach agreements. It appears as though the U.S. Justice Department and 21 state attorneys general will have to wage a formidable battle to reinstate the lawsuit and protect retail employee mobility.
Source: Reuters
Featured News
Judge Allows FTC Antitrust Case Against Amazon to Move Forward
Oct 1, 2024 by
CPI
SAP Leader Urges Caution on EU AI Rules, Warns of Competitive Disadvantage
Oct 1, 2024 by
CPI
Colorado’s Grocery Workers Unite to Oppose $24.6 Billion Supermarket Merge
Oct 1, 2024 by
CPI
Canada’s Competition Bureau Warns Businesses of Tougher Enforcement
Oct 1, 2024 by
CPI
Top Antitrust Lawyers Launch New Boutique Firm
Oct 1, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Refusal to Deal
Sep 27, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust’s Refusal-to-Deal Doctrine: The Emperor Has No Clothes
Sep 27, 2024 by
Erik Hovenkamp
Why All Antitrust Claims are Refusal to Deal Claims and What that Means for Policy
Sep 27, 2024 by
Ramsi Woodcock
The Aspen Misadventure
Sep 27, 2024 by
Roger Blair & Holly P. Stidham
Refusal to Deal in Antitrust Law: Evolving Jurisprudence and Business Justifications in the Align Technology Case
Sep 27, 2024 by
Timothy Hsieh