January 26, 2022

Volume XII, Number 26

Advertisement
Advertisement

January 26, 2022

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

January 25, 2022

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

January 24, 2022

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis
Advertisement

Massachusetts Governor Patrick Proposes Legislation Banning Non-Compete Agreements - Brave New World or California Dreaming?

At an economic development summit earlier today in Newton, Massachusetts, Governor Patrick stated that he will propose an economic growth bill that includes a prohibition on non-competition agreements that discourage workers in high-tech companies from taking their skills to a competitor. Governor Patrick stated that such agreements move beyond their core importance – protecting company trade secrets and confidential information – and instead unnecessarily stifle competition. “In California, another tech hub, they don’t have non-competes and they’re doing pretty well,” Patrick said in a previous appearance on his monthly radio show. “We want to enable that same free flow of talent in an innovation hub here in Massachusetts which is booming and it ought to have as few restraints on it as possible.”

We will provide more details regarding the proposed bill after it is published in full. Currently it appears that the bill will be modeled after California’s analogous regulations, which essentially declare such covenants to be void when based solely on an employment relationship. In turn, Governor Patrick will seek to have Massachusetts adopt the Uniform Trade Secrets Act, which prevents workers from taking companies’ intellectual property to other businesses but leaves them free to join or launch competitors (a large majority of states, including California, have adopted the Uniform Trade Secrets Act). Governor Patrick’s proposal is likely to prompt significant debate in the state legislature. As noted in a Boston Globe piece published earlier today, Governor Patrick appears mindful of the concerns of businesses and lawmakers – the proposed bill would allow businesses to continue limiting certain activities by former employees (such as stealing clients), and would not affect nondisclosure clauses that prevent former employees from publicizing private company matters.

©1994-2022 Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C. All Rights Reserved.National Law Review, Volume IV, Number 101
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

About this Author

H. Andrew Matzkin, Litigation, Employment Attorney, Mintz Levin, Law firm
Member

Drew’s work primarily involves litigation and counseling on federal and state labor and employment issues, including discrimination, sexual harassment, leaves of absence, workplace health and safety, employment handbooks and contracts, and collective bargaining agreements. 

He handles employment litigation before federal and state courts, arbitrators, and administrative agencies, including state fair employment and human rights agencies, unemployment assistance agencies, and industrial accidents agencies. Representative cases involve claims pertaining to discrimination, harassment,...

617-348-1683
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement