The Illinois Appellate Court held that these “passive” social media connections did not constitute solicitations in violation of the employment agreement. Instead, the individuals on his email contact list were all sent generic emails asking them to form a professional connection on LinkedIn. Gelineau never used LinkedIn to send direct messages to Bankers Life employees regarding professional opportunities. According to Bankers Life, several employees who connected with Gelineau clicked his profile link, learned of ASB job opportunities he posted on his LinkedIn page, applied for jobs with ASB, and were hired. Additionally, Gelineau “connected” on LinkedIn with three Bankers Life’s employees. Gelineau had signed an employment agreement with Bankers Life prohibiting him from “inducing or attempting to induce” any Bankers Life employees to resign their employment or to contract with or sell insurance products for any company other than Bankers Life.Īfter joining ASB, Gelineau did what many in his position would: he updated his LinkedIn profile to reflect his new job. Senior Benefits LLC, a Bankers Life sales manager, Charles Gelineau, left to take a similar role for a direct competitor, America Senior Benefits (ASB). LinkedIn Invitations Do Not Constitute “Solicitations.” Last month, the Illinois Appellate Court held that a former employee’s social media activities were not “solicitations” that breached his employment agreement. Illinois employers should carefully review these decisions when considering whether to pursue litigation to enforce a restrictive covenant agreement, such as a non-compete agreement, or hiring an employee who is subject to such an agreement. Over the past several months, state and federal courts in Illinois have issued several important decisions that will impact employers’ efforts to enforce post-employment restrictive covenants and protect their trade secrets.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |