Where can I find information about state employment laws for Bang Cookies?
Bang_Cookies Franchise · 2024 FDDAnswer from 2024 FDD Document
a Franchise Investment Law."
-
- Article 18 of the Franchise Agreement is hereby amended by the addition of the following language: "Provisions requiring a franchisee to consent to a limitation of claims within one year have been determined to be unfair, unjust and inequitable within the intent of Section 51-19-09 of the North Dakota Franchise Investment Law. Therefore, for North Dakota franchisees, the statute of limitations under North Dakota Law will apply."
Each provision of this amendment shall be effective only to the extent, with respect to such provision, that the jurisdictional requirements of North Dakota Law are met independently without reference to this amendment.
[SIGNATURE PAGE TO FOLLOW]
| Signature | Signature | |----------------------------------------------------------|---------------------| | Name and Title (please print) | Name (please print) | | Dated | Dated Signature Name (please print) Dated |
WASHINGTON STATE FRANCHISE AGREEMENT AMENDMENT
Amendments to the Bang Cookies Franchise Agreement
In recognition of the Washington State Franchise Investment Protection Act, Chapter 19.100 RCW, the parties to the attached Bang Cookies Franchise LLC Franchise Agreement (the "Franchise Agreement") agree as follows:
-
- In any arbitration involving a franchise purchased in Washington, the arbitration site shall be either in the State of Washington, or in a place mutually agreed upon at the time of the arbitration or as determined by the arbitrator.
-
- In the event of a conflict of laws, the provisions of the Washington Franchise Investment Protection Act, Chapter 19.100 RCW shall prevail.
-
- A release or waiver of rights executed by a franchisee shall not include rights under the Washington Franchise Investment Protection Act except when executed pursuant to a negotiated settlement after the agreement is in effect and where the parties are represented by independent counsel. Provisions such as those which unreasonably restrict or limit the statute of limitations period for claims under the Act, rights or remedies under the Act such as a right to a jury trial may not be enforceable.
-
- Transfer fees are collectable to the extent to the extent that they reflect the franchisor's reasonable estimated or actual costs in effecting a transfer.
-
- Chapter 49.62 RCW limits the use of non-competition agreements and may supersede the Franchise Agreement's non-competition provisions. Washington law provides as follows: (1) an employee noncompete covenant is unenforceable unless the employee's annual earnings exceed $100,000; (2) a presumption is created that any non-compete covenant with a duration longer than 18 months is unreasonable and unenforceable; (3) a franchisor may not restrict, restrain or prohibit a franchisee from soliciting or hiring any employee of the franchisor or a franchisee of the same franchisor; (4) any contractual provision that requires an employee to adjudicate a non-competition covenant outside of Washington State is void and unenforceable.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have duly executed and delivered this Washington State amendment to the Bang Cookies Franchise LLC Franchise Agreement on the same date as the Franchise Agreement was executed.
Source: Item 23 — RECEIPTS (FDD pages 56–245)
What This Means (2024 FDD)
According to Bang Cookies' 2024 Franchise Disclosure Document, specific information regarding state employment laws is limited but can be found within state-specific amendments. For instance, the Washington State Franchise Agreement Amendment acknowledges the Washington State Franchise Investment Protection Act, Chapter 19.100 RCW, and addresses non-competition agreements under Chapter 49.62 RCW, including stipulations about employee earnings exceeding $100,000 for non-compete covenants to be enforceable. This amendment also states that a franchisor cannot restrict a franchisee from hiring any employee of the franchisor or another franchisee and that any contractual provision requiring adjudication of a non-competition covenant outside of Washington State is void. These details are crucial for franchisees in Washington to understand their rights and obligations regarding employment.
Similarly, the Illinois FDD Amendment mentions that Illinois law governs the Franchise Agreement and addresses specific provisions related to jurisdiction, venue, and waivers of compliance with the Illinois Franchise Disclosure Act. While it doesn't directly address employment laws, it underscores the importance of adhering to Illinois state laws, which would include employment regulations. The amendment also clarifies that any provision designating jurisdiction and venue outside of Illinois is void, though arbitration may occur outside the state.
For prospective Bang Cookies franchisees, it's essential to carefully review any state-specific amendments within the FDD to understand how local laws may impact franchise operations, particularly concerning employment. Given the limited direct information on state employment laws, franchisees should consult with legal counsel in their respective states to ensure full compliance with all applicable regulations. This proactive approach will help mitigate potential legal risks and ensure smooth business operations.