Skip to content Skip to navigation


H&R Block Green Square Logo

Fast food outlets apparently aren’t the only businesses that put no-poach provisions into their franchise agreements. The complaint for this class action brings this antitrust case claiming that H&R Block, Inc. and H&R Block Tax Services, LLC also engaged in this anticompetitive practice.

Jen-Weld Door

What’s a doorskin? It’s a part of the most popular type of interior door sold in North America, the interior molded door. The complaint for this class action claims that Masonite Corporation and Jeld-Wen, Inc. violated antitrust laws despite a US Department of Justice (DOJ) effort to avoid this. 

Papa John's Pizza

Papa John’s is the fourth-largest pizza company in the world, the complaint for this class action says. As such, the complaint alleges, its no-poach agreements are likely to have an anticompetitive effect on the labor market.

Swimming Event from 2015 FINA World Championships

This antitrust class action takes on the Fédération Internationale de Natation (FINA), or the International Federation of Swimming. The complaint alleges that FINA controls swimmers’ access to participation in the Olympics and uses that control to keep swimmers’ pay low and to prevent any similar organization from entering the market. 

Espar Parking Heater

Espar, Inc., Webasto Products North America, and other related companies are settling a class action alleging that they conspired to fix the price of parking heaters. The complaint alleged that the companies’ agreements were violations of antitrust laws and that they resulted in consumers paying higher prices for the heaters than they should have.

Jiffy Lube Shop

Jiffy Lube has more than 2,000 shops across the US, and the complaint for this class action claims that it has no-poach provisions in its standard franchise agreements. The complaint alleges that wages at Jiffy Lube shops are low and that the no-poach provisions are part of the reason. 

Burger King Meal with Burger, Fries, and Drink

The complaint for this class action alleges that Burger King franchises are required to agree to no-poach agreements and that these agreements are anticompetitive and illegal and keep worker wages down.

Ranbaxy Building in India

When the patent on a drug expires, another company may make a generic version of it. But even these generics must be approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The complaint for this class action claims that Ranbaxy Laboratories Limited and its associates engaged in dishonest behavior in rushing generic applications to the FDA in order to get exclusive rights to make certain generics.

Burger King Rodeo King Burger

The complaint for this class action alleges that Burger King’s franchise agreement contains an anticompetitive clause that prevents one Burger King franchise from hiring or soliciting employees from another Burger King franchise or from hiring employees who have worked at another franchise in the past six months. The complaint claims that this no-poach agreement is an illegal conspiracy that violates federal antitrust laws.

Cold Blue Cars Parked Beside One Warm Yellow Car

This settlement resolves a class action alleging that the defendants conspired to fix or raise the price of aftermarket parking heaters. Parking heaters are used to heat commercial vehicles without running the vehicle’s engine. They include both air heaters and water or “coolant” heaters and associated accessories.