Employment Law

Jimmy John’s Restaurants No-Poach Employee Restriction Agreements

Lieff Cabraser represents Jimmy John’s fast-food employees in a lawsuit challenging Jimmy John’s practice of restricting employees who worked at a Jimmy John’s store from being hired by other Jimmy John’s stores. The practice allegedly violated the antitrust laws, and caused workers’ wages to be lower than they otherwise would have been. It also made it harder for Jimmy John’s employees to move to other stores within the Jimmy John’s system, limiting their career mobility and advancement. Jimmy John’s workers allegedly would have received higher wages but for this anticompetitive practice.

The district court has denied Jimmy John’s efforts to dismiss the lawsuit, which is currently being litigated.

Contact an Employee Rights Lawyer at Lieff Cabraser

If you work for Jimmy John’s now or recently, you may have a legal claim because your job opportunities or wages may have been suppressed by Jimmy John’s no-poach agreements. We urge you to contact Lin Y. Chan or Yaman Salahi via the form below for a free, confidential, and no-obligation review of your case. The information you provide will help us hold Jimmy John’s accountable for any violations of the antitrust laws.

First Name (required)

Last Name (required)

Email address (required)

Street Address





How did you find our site?

Are you currently represented by an attorney?

Please describe your experience, if any, with suppressed pay or job mobility restrictions at Jimmy John's:

Lieff Cabraser’s Experience With “No-Poach” Cases

In 2011, Lieff Cabraser filed a groundbreaking class action against seven of the world’s largest tech companies, including Apple, Google, and Intel, alleging a conspiracy to suppress employee pay through “no-poach” agreements. In 2015, that case resolved for settlements totaling $435 million, the largest resolution in history of antitrust claims in an employment setting. The California Daily Journal described the case as the “most significant antitrust employment case in recent history,” adding that it “has been widely recognized as a legal and public policy breakthrough.”

Lieff Cabraser continues to investigate and bring cases on behalf of employees whose compensation and mobility have been suppressed as a result of non-compete and job mobility restriction agreements.