Otunga says WWE contracts could misclassify talent, curb future work

Former WWE performer and attorney David Otunga has accused the company’s standard contracts of containing contradictory and potentially unenforceable provisions, saying the clauses that classify wrestlers as independent contractors while restricting their post‑departure work could expose WWE to legal challenges. Otunga made the comments in recent public appearances and a video in which he reviewed a 2017 WWE contract and discussed the recent departures of Andrade El Idolo and Samantha Irvin, who are reported to be subject to one‑year and two‑year noncompete periods, respectively.

WWE’s contracts, Otunga says, simultaneously label talent as independent contractors and give the company broad control over creative direction, scheduling and approval of performances. He noted that main roster releases commonly include a paid 90‑day post‑termination period that functions as a restriction on outside work, while longer unpaid noncompete provisions of up to a year appear in the underlying contracts. Otunga described the combination of classification and control as legally inconsistent and said that a court could find such noncompete terms void as a restraint on trade.