Royal

Executive Order on Non-Compete Agreements

July 28, 2021
Executive Order on Non-Compete Agreements

On July 9, 2021, President Biden signed an Executive Order aimed at promoting a more competitive marketplace for America workers, businesses, and consumers. In order to promote workers’ ability to switch jobs and negotiate higher wages, the Order encourages the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) to restrict the use of non-compete agreements in employment contracts. If the FTC does propose a ban on non-competes, there certainly would be much debate about whether the FTC has the authority to implement such a ban and whether the ban would in fact “promote competition in the American economy.


Currently non-compete agreements are regulated by states, which diverge on whether and to what extent they enforce non-compete agreements. In 2018, the Massachusetts legislature passed the Noncompetition Agreement Act limiting the use of non-compete agreements by providing strict criteria that the agreement must meet in order to be enforceable. The law applies to contracts between employers and independent contractors entered into after October 1, 2018.


The law provides that to be enforceable, a non-compete agreement:


  • must be no broader than necessary to protect employers’ legitimate business interests, which include employers’ trade secrets, employers’ confidential information, or employers’ goodwill with customers;
  • cannot last for more than one year after the end of employment; and
  • must be reasonable with respect to geographic area and activities restricted.


The law also includes a provision requiring non-compete agreements to contain a garden leave clause or some other form of mutually agreed to consideration specified in the agreement. A garden leave clause would require employers to pay employees 50% of their highest salary during the last 2 years, while the non-compete agreement was in effect.


Under the law, non-compete agreements cannot be enforced against (1) non-exempt employees; 2) employees who are terminated without cause or laid off; (3) undergraduate or graduate students engaged in an internship or other short-term employment; and (4) employees aged 18 or younger. Other Massachusetts laws also ban non-compete agreements for physicians, nurses, psychologists, social workers, broadcasters, and lawyers.


For questions about non-competes or any other employment law matter, please contact the attorneys at The Royal Law Firm at (413) 586-2288.

February 19, 2025
The Massachusetts Superior Court found that Massachusetts’ wiretap statue does not bar employers from using allegedly illegally obtained recordings in civil proceedings. In a recent case, an employee claimed she was forced to resign. Plaintiff’s coworker recorded an argument between the Plaintiff and her supervisor without her consent and shared it with supervisors. The employee then sued for discrimination and retaliation, along with two counts for violation of the wiretap statute. Massachusetts is a two-party consent state but, in this case, it was found that the consent of only one party was needed because nothing in the Wiretap Statute bars the use of an allegedly illegally obtained communication in a civil proceeding. The court found that the provisions about the use of illegally obtained communications in evidence are limited to criminal trials. However, depending on the court, results may differ, as this recording was central to proving and/or disproving the Plaintiff’s claim, and as such, the recording was indispensable as a piece of evidence. Issues with unauthorized recordings have been arising all the time in civil proceedings because recording devices are everywhere, whether they be a cell phone, laptop or other recording device. This ruling is good for employers, as if there is an otherwise inadmissible recording that is made that disproves an employee’s claims, it can be admissible as evidence if meets the same scenario above. However, employers must be careful to use these recordings as they may be inadmissible and may not show the same thing that the employer believes in the court’s eyes. This being said, it is prudent to consult an attorney before utilizing a recording for any employment action or in legal action to avoid unwanted consequences. If your business has any questions on this topic or any other matters, please do not hesitate to contact the attorneys at The Royal Law Firm at 413-586-2288.
February 14, 2025
What Are the Compliance Requirements for Private Employers?
Share by: