What It Means for WWE

In the wake of frequent releases of WWE wrestlers, questions often arise regarding the legality of WWE’s no-compete clauses and why wrestlers don’t opt to join other promotions like AEW earlier despite potential earnings. This week alone, WWE released Jinder Mahal, Veer, Sanga, Cameron Grimes, Von Wagner, Xia Li, and Xyon Quinn. The traditional belief is that these wrestlers are operating under a non-compete clause, but that’s not entirely true.

Popular Reddit account r/SquaredCircle posted an explanation of what the non-competes actually mean, also linking to a WWE employment contract of Stephanie McMahon as evidence. According to her talent contract, this confusion stems from mislabeling – what’s commonly referred to as no-competes are actually notice periods.

Essentially, when a WWE wrestler receives a 90-day notice. this is not an indication that their contract is over and they are not allowed to show up anywhere else. Instead, it indicates that their contract will terminate in 90 days. Until that time elapses, they remain under contract with WWE and continue to receive compensation. This explains why they still receive their downside payments during this period. It’s also not as simple as a wrestler deciding that they’re fine not getting paid and then showing up somewhere else since they are still under contract with WWE during that time.

For instance, if a wrestler like Jinder Maha was under the 90-day notice period and was to appear on AEW Dynamite the day after receiving the notice, it constitutes a breach of contract. This situation can lead to complications and WWE then has a right to sue the performer. However, when that 90-day period most people call a non-compete is up, there’s no notice period required because the contract is officially over.

Related

Dolph Ziggler Reveals Why He Was Released By WWE

Nic Nemeth began his WWE career in 2004, but two decades later, as Dolph Ziggler, he helped bring it to an end.

Is There A Way Released WWE Stars Can Get Around This?

The one way this rule doesn’t apply is if a wrestler were to negotiate an early release with WWE. This has been done before. The Revival/FTR are among the most notable. If WWE is willing to let a performer out of their contract, they could freely move over to another promotion without incident. They also would no longer be getting paid or receiving benefits from WWE.

For fans asking why Brock Lesnar was able to fight WWE and win, it’s likely because he had a 10-year non-compete that wasn’t seen as reasonable to enforce. So, the next time you hear a former WWE star complaining about a non-compete, just know that they’re doing so while still being paid and under a WWE contract. Most wrestlers actually appreciate WWE’s window because it gives them time to sort out their affairs, plan for the future and still get compensated.