Overview: One type of employment contract is the nonsolicitation agreement. A nonsolicitation agreement or clause typically prohibits an employee from directly or indirectly asking the employer's customers and clients to leave the current employer and join the departing employee in a new business or venture.
Nonsolicitation agreements are looked upon more favorably than noncompete agreements. However, like noncompete agreements the degree to which they are enforced varies per state. Unlike a noncompete agreement, the geographic area affected by a nonsolicitation or antisales covenant is typically limited to the area in which the customers of the former employer are located and the restriction - even within that area - applies only to those customers. Further, the time period for the nonsolicitation limitation must be reasonable and employers need to carefully draft language to ensure they are not overly broad. Otherwise, the nonsolicitation agreement may be unenforceable providing employer's clients or customers with the opportunity to join the departing employee and leading to reduced revenue should the customer or client decide to leave.
Trends: One key issue that courts focus on when confronted with a challenge to a nonsolicitation agreement is whether the agreement protects the employer's goodwill in its industry as well as the goodwill the employer acquired through its own resources. Where an employer spends a significant amount of time and money cultivating and retaining its client or customer base, it has a stronger argument defending a nonsolicitation agreement. Courts are less likely to enforce an agreement if the nonsolicitation terms extend beyond the customers or clients that the employee had actual interaction with.
Author: Melissa A. Silver, JD, Legal Editor
Updated to reflect the reduced enforceable term of a noncompetition agreement, effective January 1, 2016.
Updated to reflect new discrimination protections for victims of domestic violence, sexual offense or stalking, effective December 30, 2015.
In-depth review of the spectrum of Pennsylvania employment law requirements HR must follow with respect to terms of employment.
In-depth review of the spectrum of Michigan employment law requirements HR must follow with respect to terms of employment.
This section helps HR professionals manage challenges that come with operating in multiple states, notably complying with differing state and key municipal laws, and addresses the pros and cons of having a centralized or decentralized HR department. Trends currently affecting multistate employers are identified, such as same-sex marriage laws and tracking various state leave laws, are discussed.
Hawaii has enacted a law prohibiting agreements that forbid post-employment competition for employees in the technology business.
In-depth review of the spectrum of Indiana employment law requirements HR must follow with respect to terms of employment.
Hiring away a rival's key performer can bring a host of risks for unwary employers. On this XpertHR podcast, Texas employment attorney Mary Goodrich Nix details the litany of risks that can arise, especially if the new hire signed a restrictive covenant with his former employer, but also offers practical solutions.
In-depth review of the spectrum of Oklahoma employment law requirements HR must follow with respect to terms of employment
Restrictive covenants will continue to be enforceable in Illinois only when the employee is employed for at least two continuous years, after the Illinois Supreme Court declined to review a case challenging this standard.
HR guidance on the use of nonsolicitation agreements to prevent employees from stealing an employer's customers or clients.