A recent settlement shows that the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) will use its enforcement authority to target employer collusion in the labor market.
- The FTC brought a complaint against a medical staffing agency, Your Therapy Source, LLC, and the owner of a competing staffing agency, Integrity Home Therapy, for allegedly agreeing to reduce the rates they would pay to their staff. Simultaneously, the FTC settled the case with a consent order that forbids the parties from any future attempt to exchange pay information or to agree on the wages to be paid to their staffs.
- This was the first FTC wage-fixing enforcement action since the FTC and US Department of Justice (DOJ) issued their joint Antitrust Guidance for Human Resource Professionals in October 2016. That guidance stated that naked wage-fixing and no-poach agreements—e.g., agreements separate from or not reasonably necessary to a larger legitimate collaboration between the employers—are per se illegal under the Sherman Act.
- The respondents in the Your Therapy Source case are staffing agencies that allegedly provided therapists such as physical therapists, speech therapists and occupational therapists to home health agencies on a contract basis. The respondents were responsible for recruiting the therapists and paying them a "pay rate" per visit or per patient.
- According to the complaint, the alleged unlawful agreement began when one home health agency unilaterally notified Integrity that it was going to reduce the "bill rates" that it paid Integrity for its therapists, thus cutting into Integrity's profit margins. Integrity's owner then reached out through one of his therapists to the owner of Your Therapy Source and the two exchanged information about their respective rates paid to therapists. The two firms then reached an agreement via text message to reduce the rates they paid therapists.
- Once the respondents had reached the agreement to reduce therapists' pay, Integrity's owner allegedly reached out via text to four other competing therapy-staffing agencies to solicit their participation in the agreement.
- The FTC's complaint alleged that this conduct violated Section 5 of the FTC Act, which prohibits unfair and deceptive acts and practices.
WHAT THIS MEANS
- Wage-fixing cases have been notable in the health care industry, with prior DOJ enforcement against a hospital buying group and several class actions against health care providers in the 2000s that alleged the fixing of nurses' pay.
- Companies should strictly avoid colluding with other firms on wages, salaries, fringe benefits or other remuneration paid to workers. Companies should also exercise extreme caution in information exchanges regarding wages and benefits, which can lead to improper agreements or result in independent antitrust liability if not properly supervised.
- Firms should be mindful of the
DOJ/FTC's joint guidance on information sharing in the health
care industry (see link at p. 50), which also
provides a useful template for how the US antitrust agencies will
analyze information sharing more generally. The joint guidance
provides a safety zone for wage, salary and benefit surveys where:
- The survey is managed by a third party
- The information provided by survey participants is more than 3 months old
- There are at least five providers reporting data on which each statistic is based, no individual provider's data represents more than 25 percent on a weighted basis of that statistic, and any information disseminated is sufficiently aggregated that it would not allow recipients to identify the prices charged or compensation paid by any particular provider.
- Although FTC's settlement in this matter was civil in nature, these same facts could also have led to a criminal investigation by the DOJ Antitrust Division. The agencies' 2016 Human Resources Guidance specified that naked wage-fixing or no-poach agreements among employers could be prosecuted criminally. More recently, the DOJ has stated that it has several criminal investigations open into employer collusion in the labor market.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.