211 0182

1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

COMMISSIONERS: Lina M. Khan, Chair

Rebecca Kelly Slaughter

Christine S. Wilson

Alvaro M. Bedoya

Docket No. C-_____

COMPLAINT

Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act, as amended, 15 U.S.C. § 41, et 

seq., and by virtue of the authority vested in it by said Act, the Federal Trade Commission 

(“Commission”), having reason to believe that Ardagh Group S.A., Ardagh Glass Inc., and Ardagh 

Glass Packaging Inc., corporations (collectively “Ardagh”), hereinafter sometimes referred to as

“Respondent,” has violated the provisions of Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 

U.S.C. § 45, and it appearing to the Commission that a proceeding by it in respect thereof would 

be in the public interest, hereby issues this Complaint stating its charges in that respect as follows: 

NATURE OF THE CASE

1. This action addresses the unfair use by Respondent of post-employment covenants not to 

compete. The term post-employment covenants not to compete (or “Non-Compete 

Agreements”), as used in this complaint, refers to contract terms that, following the 

conclusion of a worker’s employment with one employer, restrict the worker’s freedom to 

accept employment with competing businesses or otherwise to compete with the employer. 

In the Matter of

Ardagh Group S.A., 

 a corporation, 

Ardagh Glass Inc. 

 a corporation, and

Ardagh Glass Packaging Inc. 

 a corporation. 
211 0182

2

RESPONDENT

2. Respondent Ardagh Group S.A. is a corporation organized, existing, and doing business 

under, and by virtue of, the laws of Luxembourg, with its executive offices and principal 

place of business at 56, rue Charles Martel, L-2134, Luxembourg, Luxembourg.

3. Respondent Ardagh Glass Inc. is a corporation organized, existing, and doing business 

under, and by virtue of, the laws of the State of Delaware with its executive office and 

principal place of business located at 10194 Crosspoint Blvd., Suite 410, Indianapolis, IN 

46256.

4. Respondent Ardagh Glass Packaging Inc. is a corporation organized, existing, and doing 

business under, and by virtue of the laws of the State of Delaware with its executive offices 

and principal place of business located at 10194 Crosspoint Blvd., Suite 410, Indianapolis, 

IN 46256. 

JURISDICTION

5. At all times relevant herein, Ardagh has been, and Ardagh is now, a corporation, as 

“corporation” is defined in Section 4 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. § 44.

6. Ardagh has engaged in and continues to engage in commerce and activities affecting 

commerce in the United States, as the term “commerce” is defined in Section 4 of the 

Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. § 44.

GLASS CONTAINER INDUSTRY

7. Respondent manufactures and sells glass containers used for food and beverage packaging. 

The primary customers of such glass containers are companies that sell food, beer, nonalcoholic beverages, and wine and spirits.

8. The glass container industry in the United States is highly concentrated. There are 

substantial barriers to entry and expansion, including the ability to identify and employ 

personnel with skills and experience in glass container manufacturing.

RESPONDENT’S NON-COMPETE AGREEMENTS

9. For over a decade, Respondent has required employees across a variety of positions to enter 

into Non-Compete Agreements with Respondent. These agreements typically required

that, for two years following the conclusion of the worker’s employment with Respondent,

the worker may not directly or indirectly “perform or provide the same or substantially 

similar services” to those the worker performed for Ardagh to any business in the United 

States, Canada, or Mexico that is “involved with or that supports the sale, design, 

development, manufacture, or production of glass containers” in competition with Ardagh. 

At the outset of the Commission’s investigation, Ardagh had Non-Compete Agreements in 
211 0182

3

effect with over 700 current employees, including salaried employees who work with the 

plants’ furnaces and forming equipment and in other glass production, engineering, and 

quality assurance roles.

10. Respondent’s use of Non-Compete Agreements as described herein is unfair and has the 

tendency or likely effect of harming competition, consumers, and workers, including by: 

(i) impeding the entry and expansion of rivals in the glass container industry, (ii) reducing 

employee mobility, and (iii) causing lower wages and salaries, reduced benefits, less 

favorable working conditions, and personal hardship to employees. 

11. Any legitimate objectives of Respondent’s conduct as alleged herein could have been 

achieved through significantly less restrictive means, including, for example, by entering 

confidentiality agreements that prohibit employees and former employees from disclosing 

company trade secrets and other confidential information. 

VIOLATION CHARGED

12. The allegations in all of the paragraphs above are re-alleged and incorporated by reference 

as though fully set forth herein.

13. Respondent’s conduct constitutes an unfair method of competition with a tendency or 

likelihood to harm competition, consumers, and employees in the glass container industry, 

in violation of Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, as amended, 15 U.S.C. 

§ 45. Such conduct, or the effects thereof, will continue or recur in the absence of 

appropriate relief. 

WHEREFORE, THE PREMISES CONSIDERED, the Federal Trade Commission on 

this [insert] day of [insert month], 2022, issues its complaint against Respondent. 

By the Commission. 

April Tabor

Secretary

SEAL