New Lawsuit Targets H&R Block Employee Anti Poaching Agreement

A new lawsuit says that an employee anti poaching agreement used by tax preparation company H&R Block is illegal. The no-poach hiring practices have come under fire and are also the subject of a state investigation.

An employee anti poaching agreement is a tool that has been used throughout many franchised businesses as a way of directly discouraging managers and hiring professionals from accepting an employee who worked at another franchise location from getting employment at a new location. Typically, franchise operators who are subject to an employee anti poaching agreement are forbidden from hiring employees of any other franchise operator throughout the chain.

Agreements like these have been called into question lately, as they may constitute anti-competitive behavior that violates state or federal antitrust laws. In this H&R Block lawsuit, the former worker alleges that the use of an illegal employee anti poaching agreement caused workers to unknowingly be limited in their employment options.

The plaintiff behind the employee anti poaching agreement lawsuit argues that she suffered harm as a result of the no-poach hiring practices. She says she was a previous manager for an H&R Block tax office when it was shut down. She then allegedly made an effort to obtain employment at other H&R Block offices and found that those offices would not even talk to her as a result of the use of a no-poach clause.

The employee anti poaching agreement lawsuit alleges that since 2009, the tax preparation company has used a no-poaching clause in the standard franchise agreement that allows more than 3,300 H&R Block tax offices to run under franchisee management.

The lawsuit also alleges that H&R Block’s no-poach policy prevented employees who had connections with franchise offices from getting hired at the 6,700 tax offices owned by the parent company.

The H&R Block lawsuit says that this policy has forced employees to accept lower wages because they were unsuccessfully able to market their skills, some of which were specific to working at H&R Block. Those employees, according to the lawsuit, had to learn techniques and processes specific to H&R Block, but could not use those to obtain employment in a different location if their employment ceased or their previous location closed.

The H&R Block class action lawsuit seeks to represent a proposed Class of all H&R Block employees who work there from January 2009 through May 10, 2018.

Employee Anti Poaching Agreement Under Investigation

Numerous states’ attorneys general have challenged the use and legality of an employee anti poaching agreement, particularly as it relates to fast food chains.  In Washington, Attorney General Bob Ferguson has secured formal agreements with more than three dozen companies who may have previously been accused of using an employee anti poaching agreement.

Employee allegations of use of these employee anti poaching agreements, however, have wound up in other industries. Many other companies were identified in an academic study as using no-poach clauses in franchisee contracts.

The Kansas City Star reports that H&R Block is currently under investigation by the Washington state attorney general’s office, though that office has not made any formal announcement of that investigation.

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