Recently, we wrote about New Hampshire's attempts to piggyback on Massachusetts' material change doctrine. In this post, we're taking a look at Connecticut's latest legislative effort to limit non-competes-House Bill 5249.
In many ways, HB 5249 borrows from Massachusetts' 2018 bill (although unlike the New Hampshire bill, it doesn't tackle the material change doctrine). For example, like the Massachusetts Noncompetition Agreement Act, the law would limit non-competes to a geographic area commensurate with where the employee works during the last 2 years of their employment, and to the kinds of work the employee performs during those 2 years. The duration of a non-compete would typically be limited to no longer than one year like under Massachusetts law, except that the Connecticut bill would permit a covenant of up to two years where the employer pays the employee's base salary and benefits.
The Connecticut bill would also prohibit non-competes for non-exempt workers (like Massachusetts and several other states) or for those who earn less than three times the Connecticut minimum wage. Also borrowed from the MNCA is a strikingly similar notice provision, which would require the employer to provide a copy of the non-compete to the employee "not later than ten business days prior to (A) the worker's deadline to accept an offer from the employer or the contractor for employment or to enter into an independent contractor relationship, or (B) the date such covenant is signed,...
President Lee Jae Myung called Tuesday for a firm government response to the spread of false information about eggs imported from Brazil. During a closed-door session of a Cabinet meeting at Cheon...