Understanding Non-Compete Agreements
Non-compete agreements (also called covenants not to compete or restrictive covenants) are contractual provisions that restrict an employee's ability to work for a competitor or start a competing business after leaving their employer. These agreements have been a common tool for protecting trade secrets, customer relationships, and proprietary business information.
For HR professionals studying for the SHRM-CP or SHRM-SCP exam, the legal landscape of non-compete agreements is an evolving area within employment law. The SHRM exam may test your understanding of enforceability standards, state-specific restrictions, and alternative approaches to protecting business interests.
The enforceability of non-compete agreements varies dramatically by state. While some states enforce reasonable non-competes, others have banned or severely restricted them. HR professionals must understand these differences to develop effective, lawful post-employment restrictions.
Enforceability Standards
In states that enforce non-compete agreements, courts generally apply a "reasonableness" test that evaluates several factors:
- Duration: The time period of the restriction must be reasonable. Courts typically consider periods of 6 months to 2 years as potentially reasonable, depending on the industry and circumstances. Restrictions exceeding 2 years are often viewed skeptically.
- Geographic scope: The geographic area covered by the restriction must be reasonable and related to the employer's actual business territory. Overly broad geographic restrictions (such as "worldwide" for a local business) are less likely to be enforced.
- Scope of activity: The restriction must be narrowly tailored to protect legitimate business interests. Prohibiting the employee from working in any capacity for any competitor is generally considered overly broad.
- Legitimate business interest: The employer must have a legitimate interest to protect, such as trade secrets, confidential information, customer relationships, or specialized training provided to the employee.
- Consideration: The agreement must be supported by adequate consideration. For new employees, the job offer itself may be sufficient. For existing employees, additional consideration (such as a bonus, promotion, or continued employment) may be required depending on the jurisdiction.
Some states allow courts to "blue pencil" (modify) overbroad non-competes to make them enforceable, while others void the entire agreement if any part is unreasonable.
State Variations and Recent Developments
The legal landscape for non-competes is changing rapidly:
- California: Non-compete agreements are generally void and unenforceable under California Business and Professions Code Section 16600, with very limited exceptions (such as the sale of a business).
- Other restrictive states: North Dakota, Oklahoma, and several other states have enacted significant limitations on non-compete enforceability.
- Wage thresholds: Several states (including Colorado, Illinois, Oregon, and Washington) prohibit non-competes for employees earning below specified salary thresholds, reflecting a policy judgment that non-competes should not restrict lower-wage workers.
- Federal developments: The FTC has pursued rulemaking to limit or ban non-compete agreements nationwide, though the legal status and scope of any final rule remains subject to litigation and legislative activity. HR professionals should monitor these developments closely.
- Notice requirements: Some states require employers to provide advance notice (before the start of employment or with a specified number of days' notice) before a non-compete takes effect.
Alternatives to Non-Compete Agreements
Given the trend toward restricting non-competes, HR professionals should consider alternative approaches to protecting business interests:
- Non-solicitation agreements: Restrict the employee from soliciting the employer's customers, clients, or employees. These are generally viewed more favorably by courts because they are narrower in scope.
- Non-disclosure agreements (NDAs): Protect confidential information and trade secrets without restricting where the employee can work.
- Garden leave clauses: Require the employee to remain on the employer's payroll (and unavailable to competitors) during a transition period after giving notice of resignation.
- Intellectual property agreements: Protect the employer's ownership of inventions, works, and ideas created during employment.
- Retention incentives: Use deferred compensation, equity vesting schedules, or retention bonuses that the employee forfeits upon early departure.
These alternatives can often provide effective protection without the legal uncertainty and employee relations challenges associated with non-compete agreements.
Start Practicing Today
Non-compete law is a dynamic area tested on the SHRM exam, which consists of 134 questions over 4 hours at Prometric or OnVUE. Understand enforceability standards, state variations, and alternative protections.
SHRMpractice.com covers non-competes and other contract-related employment law topics. Take our diagnostic to evaluate your readiness, and sign up to access our full SHRM exam study platform.