The Anti-monopoly Regulation Dilemma in the "No-Poaching Agreements" and Countermeasures
摘要: 继欧美等国家和地区之后,我国首次针对“互不挖角协议”开展反垄断执法活动。“互不挖角协议”所引发的竞争损害显著,反垄断法对其规制不仅匹配制度逻辑,更契合国内外实践趋势。然而,当下反垄断法规制仍存在价值取向上忽视劳动者利益保护,行为认定上偏重横向垄断 协议路径与执法过程上缺乏事前合规监管的困境。要破解这一困境,亟须坚持保护竞争过程以调 适价值理念,构设双重规制路径以改进行为认定,建立事前合规制度以前迁执法过程,从而不断完 善“互不挖角协议”的反垄断法规制。
Abstract: The"no-poaching agreement" violates the spirit of the Anti-Monopoly Law of the People’s Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as the"Anti-Monopoly Law" ), and anti-monopoly law enforcement activities against the "no-poaching agreement" outside the country are increasing. The damage to competition caused by the "no-poaching agreement" is significant, and its regulation in the Anti-Monopoly Law conforms not only to the institutional logic, but also to the practice trend at home and abroad. However, However, in regulating "nopoaching agreements", antitrust laws are in the dilemma of improper value orientation, neglect of protection of employee interests , poor behavior identification, emphasis on monopoly agreement path and fragmentation of law enforcement process, and lack of ex ante regulation . To solve this dilemma, it is urgent to adjust the value concept, adhere to protection of competition process , construct a dual regulation path, and to establish a precompliance system to promote the anti-monopoly regulation of "non-poaching agreement" .
[V1] | 2025-02-25 09:38:33 | PSSXiv:202502.01325V1 | 下载全文 |
1. 版权法视角下学术期刊增强出版的激励路径实现 | 2025-04-27 |
2. 气候变化诉讼的中国路径 | 2025-04-27 |
3. 中国气候变化诉讼的困境审视与完善路径——以“弃风弃光”案为切入点 | 2025-04-27 |
4. “双碳”目标下气候变化诉讼的法律进路 | 2025-04-27 |
5. 德法兼治下的促进型立法:何以产生与何以促进 | 2025-04-27 |