Quote Originally Posted by DrSayre View Post
Matt Bruenig has filed charges against Louder with Crowder with the National Labor Relations Board https://www.nlrbedge.com/p/i-have-fi...labor-practice

The charges claim Louder with Crowder violate these unfair labor practices:
* Maintaining an illegal confidentiality rule in an employment agreement.
* Maintaining an illegal confidentiality rule in a separation agreement.
* Maintaining an illegal non-disparagement rule in a separation agreement.
* Engaging in unlawful interrogation and surveillance by seeking to obtain information about protected activity using the tools of judicial discovery.
* Sending legal threats instructing Jared to not engage in protected activity.
* Filing a baseless, retaliatory lawsuit that seeks the illegal objective of enforcing illegal confidentiality and non-disparagement rules.

If these charges prevail, all former employees will be released from their NDAs and LwC would have to reimburse Jared for all legal expenses.
I saw this. Very interesting.

This was in response to Crowder filing an actual lawsuit against Jared on March 27.

Jared winning this complaint is not automatic. I am no expert in separation agreement law, but my understanding is that this will come down to whether or not Jared was coerced into signing a restrictive separation agreement upon leaving.

If it can be shown that Jared did not sufficiently gain from giving up various rights via the agreement, and that it was likely signed out of fear of frivolous litigation, it is likely they will rule for Jared. If you recall, Jared's story is that he signed it because they were willing to do a carveout for a media job he was offered, which otherwise would not be competing with Louder with Crowder. If that's true, Jared will probably prevail here, as simply promising not to sue him for taking another job is not enough consideration on Jared's side for making him sign a restrictive agreement. Additionally, if they violated their own agreement by threatening his new company anyway, that's another way he can get the ruling in his favor.

How could the ruling go against Jared? If he accepted a substantial severance package not previously offered, but available in exchange for the agreement, he would likely lose here. If his original terms of employment came with a restrictive agreement, he might also lose this.

Not sure how long it takes to rule on these.