This will be an interesting one to watch…
As part of its aim to boost innovation and increase competition to support economic growth, the government is consulting on whether to change the rules on post-employment non-compete restrictions.
Non-competes have their place: stopping an employee from running off and joining a competitor is sometimes required and appropriate. However, in other instances they unfairly impact upon a worker’s ability to find alternative work. What could we do to strike a better balance?
Require employers to pay staff during the restrictive period like they do in France? Follow California’s lead and ban them altogether? Require employers to give staff further information on what the non-compete means when they sign-up? Perhaps we could limit their duration.
On the one hand, some employers will be horrified by these suggestions. On the other, however, perhaps certainty is a good thing. We all know that enforcing a non-compete can be a bit of a grey-area, so a clearer framework in which employers can operate could be a welcomed development.
You have until 26 February 2021 to registered your thoughts. Get thinking.
proposals to make non-compete clauses enforceable only when the employer provides compensation during the term of the clause, and whether this could be complemented by additional transparency measures and statutory limits on the length of non-compete clauses
