Non-competes for Existing Employees May Require Additional Consideration

22 January 2018 Labor & Employment Law Perspectives Blog
Authors: Jeffrey A. Simmons

It is not uncommon for employers to ask existing employees to sign non-compete agreements. For example, new management may want to tighten up a company’s protections. Or, changes in the business may make the need for employee non-competes more important.  But non-compete agreements signed by existing employees are not always enforceable and often require the employee to receive meaningful new consideration. In other words, the employee must receive something of value in return for the promise not to compete.

The majority of states permit continued employment by itself to serve as consideration for a non-compete agreement. In at least twelve states, however, some form of additional consideration is required.  And, in at least six other states, the law regarding the need for additional consideration is unclear.

The requirement of additional consideration is usually driven by a concern that employers otherwise might insist that employees sign “afterthought” non-compete agreements shortly before firing them. Such a move would seriously limit opportunities for new employment with no offsetting benefit for the employee.

The type and amount of additional consideration necessary varies significantly depending on the state in which the agreement is being enforced. In most states that require consideration beyond continued employment, additional consideration can take the form of a change of job duties, a promotion, additional compensation or additional benefits.  Access to confidential information or additional training may also suffice.  In North Carolina, a one-time payment of $500 has been deemed sufficient consideration for an existing employee’s non-compete agreement.

Courts may also consider the length of time the employee remained employed after signing the non-compete. At one extreme, an Illinois appeals court has held that an existing employee must receive at least two years of additional employment before a non-compete is enforceable.  At the other extreme, the Wisconsin Supreme Court has held that there is no minimum amount of additional employment required, but if an employer terminates an employee shortly after executing the non-compete the employee may be able to void the agreement based on fraudulent inducement.

When drafting a non-compete agreement for an existing employee, check the rules for the state whose law is most likely to apply and consult with counsel to ensure that your company’s agreement complies with those rules. And it’s always best to expressly state in the agreement exactly what additional consideration the employee is receiving in exchange for the covenant not to compete.

Finally, in addition to the questions of whether and how you can ask existing employees to sign non-competes, be aware of the many other considerations regarding whether a non-compete agreement is enforceable.

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.

Related Services

Insights

Bad Holiday Season News! Estimates of an increase of Cyberattacks 20%!
13 December 2019
Internet, IT & e-Discovery Blog
Driving the Future of Automotive Technology
12 December 2019
Manufacturing Industry Advisor
Massachusetts Governor Proposes Facility Fee Ban
12 December 2019
Health Care Law Today
American Rule Prevails; PTO May Not Collect In-House Attorneys' Fees as "Expenses"
12 December 2019
IP Litigation Current
ACCC 46th Annual Meeting & Cancer Center Business Summit
04-05 March 2020
Washington, D.C.
Foley/Deloitte Compliance and Privacy Officer Roundtable
27 February 2020
Boston, MA
Let’s Talk Compliance
24 January 2020
Orlando, FL
New England Alliance Annual Meeting
15-17 January 2020
Woodstock, VT