Employees Express Frustration over H&R Block No Poach Agreement

A few employees of H&R Block have chosen to take legal action regarding this use of a no poach agreement.

A no poach agreement is an agreement between a parent company and its franchisees not to hire employees who have worked for another franchisee. Employees say a no poach agreement clause prevents franchises under the H&R Block umbrella from recruiting employees from other H&R Block offices.

A recent lawsuit against the company argues that this agreement constitutes a conspiracy to prevent H&R Block employees from getting gainful employment at other franchise locations as a way to suppress wages.

H&R Block tax preparers or managers who attempted to get a position at another location may have been unable to do so as a result of a no poach agreement, according to a lawsuit against the company.

The H&R Block employee might not have realized that he or she was blocked from being employed at another location due to his or her previous service at a separate location. An H&R Block employee who discovers the use of a no poach agreement might be interested to know that other employees have taken legal action because of these problematic agreements.

According to a recent lawsuit against the company, H&R Block started using a no poaching agreement in January of 2009 through at least May of 2018.

U.S. antitrust laws have targeted companies that use a no poach agreement, including those that could have blocked opportunities for an H&R Block employee because they prohibit mobility options.

No poach agreements can also impede an employee’s ability to increase their own wages. Anyone who worked as an H&R Block employee between 2009 and May 2018 and who attempted to get employment at another H&R Block franchise, such as after moving or in a nearby town, may have been affected by the use of a no poach agreement.

An initial lawsuit regarding the alleged no poach agreement used by H&R Block was filed by a man who says he worked for an Illinois office. The H&R Block employee says his wages were suppressed because he blocked from pursuing other higher paying jobs with the company because of the no-poach agreement.

The franchise agreement for H&R Block claims that the individual franchise has complete control over all employment-related decisions. The class action lawsuit filed against the company argues that the use of a no poach agreement takes this individual autonomy away from each franchise location.

The lawsuit filed against H&R Block claims that the no poach agreement restricts competition and suppresses wages for employees in the market. An H&R Block employee might have been interested in transferring to another office for better pay, but could have been stymied because of these allegedly illegal no poaching agreements between the franchises.

Across various industries, no poaching agreements have been targeted by employees who say they have been harmed by the use of employee restriction clauses. These workers argue that they have been blocked from being able to move between different franchise organization locations in pursuit of higher pay.

Join a Free H&R Block Employee Class Action Lawsuit Investigation

If you were an H&R Block employee at any time between 2009 and May 2018 and were prevented from obtaining employment at another H&R Block franchise, you may qualify to file an H&R Block class action lawsuit.

Learn More