Employment in Financial Services

Regarding anyone in an executive position (i.e. members of the legal administrative body, the effective management and independent controllers) at a financial institution, it is necessary to use the forms provided by the NBB to ensure that they are “fit and proper” and are authorised by the NBB (see question 2).

It is also recommended to foresee restrictive covenants in the employment contract, such as confidentiality, other professional activities, non-solicitation, non-competition and intellectual property provisions.

There is no legal requirement for specific documents, and the CLT does not require a contract. However, contracts are a customary business practice in several sectors, including financial services.

The hiring of employees in the financial services sector follows the common law regime. Thus, in principle, the hiring of an employee means the contractualising of the employment relationship. Although it is not in principle mandatory for the parties to sign an employment contract, but for exceptional cases (part-time employment contract, fixed-term contract, etc), it is nevertheless recommended to contractualise the relationship to avoid any future dispute.

It is also common, at the time of hiring, for the employee to commit to a non-compete and confidentiality obligation concerning his employer, either through clauses in his employment contract or through a separate agreement. These obligations must be the subject of a signed document and are therefore generally incorporated into the employment contract. In addition, most companies in the financial services sector make the hiring of an employee conditional upon that person signing a charter of good conduct or a policy to prevent and manage conflicts of interest.

The employer is also required to make a pre-employment declaration.

Finally, as stated, for certain positions, the employer must notify the ACPR or the ECB of the hire, and they must ratify the appointment.

German law does not treat financial services employees differently from employees of other industries, in that an employment agreement does not necessarily have to be in writing to come into existence. It is, however, common (best) practice and highly recommended for risk mitigation and transparency reasons that parties enter into a written employment agreement. For some provisions to be valid, such as a post-contractual non-compete or a fixed-term agreement, a qualified electronic or wet-ink signature is mandatory.

Further, employers must also provide employees with a wet-ink signed certification document summarising the essential conditions of employment under the German Evidence Act. Failure to provide such a document does not render the employment contract invalid, but a breach of the documentation requirement constitutes an administrative offence that may trigger fines. The German government has proposed an Act to modify the wet-ink signature requirement and also allow for electronic signatures, but has not provided a clear timeline for it coming into force yet.

Remuneration is typically governed under the employment contract and references a firm’s remuneration policy, which must be put in place for regular staff as well as identified risk-takers, with a dedicated set of rules varying per industry sub-sector.

Finally, depending on the case, certain documentation may need to be filed with BaFin before an employee can take up their tasks (see question 2).

In addition to an employment contract, there are additional documentation requirements in connection with the application or transfer of the employee’s licence with the financial regulators.

When engaging employees within the financial services industry, documents covering past employment, educational qualifications, certificates of achievement, income tax returns, medical health fitness certificates attested by a registered doctor, official identity cards and proof of address (Aadhar Card and Voter ID card, Driving Licence or Passport) and documentation for anything mentioned on a curriculum vitae. In the financial services industry, certificates showing excellence in finance-related services will increase the candidature of a potential employee. The contract of employment of an employer usually contains clauses that make the offer conditional upon the fulfilment of the employee's representations relating to educational qualifications, background, work experience, skill certifications (if applicable), character certificate, etc.

The following documents should be in place:

• written statement of terms of employment e.g., a written contract of employment that complies with the Terms of Employment (Information) Act 1994-2014 and the European Union (Transparent and Predictable Working Conditions) Regulations 2022;
• grievance and disciplinary policy;
• protected disclosures policy;
• dignity at work policy (anti-harassment and bullying prevention);
• safety statement; and
• where possible, an employee handbook that details all the statutory leave policies and other bespoke policies of the RFSP.

As a matter of general Isle of Man employment law, employers must give employees written particulars of their terms and conditions of employment within four weeks of them starting work, pursuant to section 8 of the Employment Act 2006. This mandatory information includes (but is not limited to) the names of the employer and employee; the date of commencement of employment and the date when continuous service began for statutory employment rights purposes; scale or rate of remuneration; hours of work; and holiday entitlement. Typically, a written employment contract will contain the relevant information and satisfy these requirements.  

Financial institutions should also ensure that contracts of employment reinforce the requirements of meeting and maintaining the employee’s “fit and proper” status.

According to article 25 of the FLL, the following information must be included in an employee’s contract: full name, date of birth, nationality, gender, marital status, address, Federal Taxpayers Registry number, and Unique Population Registration Key. To verify such information, employers may ask employees to provide their official identification, proof of address, Tax Identification Card, and professional and academic records, among other documents as deemed necessary. 

Furthermore, given the requirements to be met by the general manager and officers, it is common practice in Mexico to include a statement in their employment contracts whereby they state that they:

• are in good standing;
• are resident in Mexico;
• have legal, financial and management expertise;
• have satisfactory credit record and credit eligibility; and
• have no legal impediment to occupying such positions and rendering their services.

Additionally, the general manager of controlling entities and brokerage houses must provide a written document stating that he or she:

• has no impediment to being appointed as general manager or officer;
• is up to date with his or her credit obligations and of any other nature; and
• acknowledge all rights and obligations to be assumed as a consequence of his or her appointment.

All employees must provide identity documentation and required diplomas to the financial services sector employer (including relevant Wft diploma(s), see question 4).

Before entering into an employment agreement, almost all financial services sector companies require a certificate of conduct (VOG). A VOG is a document by which the Dutch minister of legal protection declares that a candidate's (judicial) past does not constitute an obstacle to fulfilling a specific task or position. When assessing a VOG application, the Dutch minister of legal protection checks whether a candidate has criminal offences to his name that pose a risk to the position or purpose for which he is applying for the VOG.

Reference checks, declarations and other documentation to ensure that the employee is a fit and proper person should be requested. In addition, notices to MAS or MAS’ approval may be required for more senior roles (see question 2).

There should also be an employment contract in place, addressing matters such as individual licences (where required) and continued compliance with all applicable MAS guidelines, notices, advisories and regulations. In drafting these contracts, FIs should take into account MAS’ Guidelines and Advisories, including the Guidelines on Fit and Proper Criteria, Individual Accountability and Conduct, and (where relevant) Risk Management Practices – Board and Senior Management. Robust confidentiality obligations and other restrictive covenants are also commonplace.

No special contractual documents are required when engaging employees within the financial services industry.

However, it is generally recommended to conclude a written employment contract with each employee. FINMA, for instance, requires a copy of employment contracts concluded with senior management of regulated entities.
In particular, the employment contract should reference the employer’s (regulatory) set of directions and the employee’s obligation to comply with said instructions. In addition, because regulated companies such as banks, securities firms, fund management companies, managers of collective assets or asset managers are required to obtain authorisation from FINMA before the engagement of key personnel, it may be sensible to include a condition precedent relating to FINMA’s acceptance of the relevant employee in the employment contract.

The mandatory, partially mandatory, and optional elements of an individual employment contract are outlined in article 319 et seq of the CO (in particular regarding remuneration, working time, vacation, and incapacity for work). Further regulations may apply based on collective bargaining agreements.

Employees must be provided with an employment contract across the different jurisdictions in the UAE.  This applies to all employees, regardless of whether they work in the financial services industry.

In the DIFC, the DIFC Employment Law requires employers to provide their employees with a written contract that must specify the following:

• the parties’ names;
• the start date;
• the salary and any allowances to be provided to the employee;
• the applicable pay period;
• hours and days of work;
• vacation leave and pay;
• notice to be given by either party to terminate employment; 
• the employee’s job title;
• confirmation as to whether the contract is for an indefinite period or for a fixed term;
• the place of work;
• applicable disciplinary rules and grievances procedures;
• the probation period;
• a reference to any applicable policies and procedures (including any codes of conduct) and where these can be accessed; and
• any other matter that may be prescribed in any regulations issued under the DIFC Employment Law.

In the ADGM, the ADGM Employment Regulations requires employers to provide their employees with a written contract that must specify the following:

• the parties’ names;
• the start date;
• remuneration;
• the applicable pay period;
• hours and days of work; and
• any terms and conditions relating to:
  • vacation leave and pay, national holiday entitlement and pay;
  • sick leave and sick pay;
  • the notice period that either party is required to give to the other in order to terminate employment;
  • the employee’s job title;
  • whether the employment is for an indefinite or fixed term;
  • the place of work;
  • any disciplinary rules or grievance procedures applicable to the employee; and

any other matter that may be prescribed by the employer.

As a matter of general UK employment law, employers must give employees written particulars of certain terms and conditions of employment. This is known as a “section 1 statement” after section 1 of the Employment Rights Act 1996, which sets out the mandatory information that employers must give to employees no later than the first day of their employment. This includes fundamental information such as the names of the employer and employee; the date of commencement of employment; the rates and timing of pay; and working hours. Other prescribed particulars (such as information regarding pensions, collective agreements and training) can be provided to employees in instalments within two months of commencement of employment. Typically, a written employment contract will contain the relevant information to satisfy these requirements.

Financial services employers should ensure that, in addition, their employment contracts reinforce the requirements of SM&CR. This will help the employer manage the employment relationship in a manner compliant with SM&CR and demonstrate to the relevant regulators the employer’s commitment to compliance with SM&CR. The employment contract will usually include, therefore, additional provisions regarding the completion of SM&CR-compliant background checks; confirmation of the employee’s regulated function (eg, their SMF or certification function); required regulatory standards of conduct; cooperation with fitness and propriety assessments; and tailored termination events.

In addition, all senior managers must have a statement of responsibility setting out their role and responsibilities. Certain firms must also allocate certain regulator-prescribed responsibilities (prescribed responsibilities) among senior managers. It is common to set out a senior manager’s regulatory responsibilities in their employment contract.

Dual-regulated firms must also ensure that individuals approved to carry out a PRA-designated SMF are subject to any specific contractual requirements required by the PRA. For example, depending on the type of firm, a firm may be required to ensure that the relevant individual is contractually required to comply with certain standards of conduct, such as to act with integrity and with due care and skill (among other requirements).

FINRA

Broker-dealers and investment advisors regulated by FINRA must electronically file FINRA’s Form U4 when registering “associated persons” with FINRA or transferring their registration to another broker-dealer. Broker-dealers must also create and implement written procedures to verify the facts disclosed by prospective employees on the U4.

• “Associated persons” include employees of all levels involved with investment and securities operations.
• The U4 form requires disclosure of the associated person’s background history, including any criminal convictions or civil actions, regulatory proceedings or sanctions, administrative proceedings, financial disclosures (such as bankruptcy), customer complaints, or arbitration awards.

Form U4 also contains an agreement requiring employees to submit to arbitration “any dispute, claim or controversy that may arise between [them and their] firm, or a customer, or any other person…”

Member firms must provide registered employees with an arbitration disclosure when asked to sign a U4.

SEC

SEC-regulated entities require every prospective employee to complete a questionnaire disclosing their identifying information, employment history, and record of any disciplinary actions, denial or suspension of membership of registration, criminal record, or any record of civil action against that employee. FINRA form U4, if completed, fulfils the requirements of this Rule.

California

California employees must be provided with:

• A notice of workers’ compensation rights;
• notice of disability insurance and paid family leave insurance benefits;
• sexual harassment information under the Fair Employment and Housing Act;
• notice of pay information (if applicable);
• commission contract (if applicable);
• notice of rights for victims of crime or abuse; and
• lactation accommodation policy

New York

New York employees must be provided with:

• notice of pay rate and pay days;
• commissions Agreement (if applicable);
• New York Health and Essential Rights Act;
• notice of electronic monitoring;
• New York State Workers’ Compensation Board Statement of Rights – Disability Benefits Law;
• New York State Paid Family Leave Statement of Rights;
• New York City Earned Safe and Sick Time Act (City only);
• New York City Stop Sexual Harassment Act fact sheet (City only); and
• New York City Pregnancy Accommodations at Work fact sheet (City only).

There are no specific rules for the financial services sector, except that they cannot have an effect that does not respect the caps for remuneration (see question 7).

Yes, restrictive covenants are possible for financial service employees. However, restrictions on work in other companies in the sector (non-competition) must be paid for less than 24 months. These criteria are not provided for by law, but were constructed by Brazilian courts when adjudicating on this issue.

Three specific clauses are potentially relevant to employees in the financial services sector.

Firstly, regarding the confidentiality clause, employees in the financial services sector are bound to respect professional and banking secrecy.

More specifically, article 25 of Section III of Chapter 4 of Title II of Book 1 of the national collective agreement for financial companies of 22 November 1968, provides that all staff members are bound by professional secrecy within the company and towards third parties. Employees may not knowingly pass on to another company information specific to their employer or previous employer.

Article 24 of Chapter 3 of Title III of the national collective bargaining agreement for bank employees of 10 January 2000 codifies the absolute respect of professional secrecy.

Article 44 of Chapter 2 of Title IV of the national collective bargaining agreement for the financial markets of 11 June 2010 states that the employee must comply specifically with the rules of conduct regarding professional secrecy, both within the company and concerning third parties.

Confidentiality clauses can also be concluded between the employee and his or her employer, to reinforce the obligation of confidentiality.

In principle, a confidentiality clause allows for the protection of certain information exchanged during the contract and can be enforced after the termination of the employment contract if it is not perpetual. In this case, it is quite conceivable to contractualise such an obligation for employees in the financial services sector because of their functions, which by their very nature require discretion.

The law already states that anyone who uses or discloses confidential information obtained in the course of negotiations without authorisation is liable. Case law has addressed the issue of confidentiality clauses by ruling that an employee not executing this clause after his or her departure makes him or her liable for the resulting damage, without the employer having to prove gross negligence. The clause may be accompanied by a pecuniary sanction, which may be altered by the judge if it is lenient or excessive.

This clause in no way imposes a non-compete obligation and, therefore, does not entitle the employee to financial compensation.

In practice, it is complex to ensure compliance with this clause; however, the more specific the clause, the more effective it is.

Secondly, a non-compete clause allows an employer to limit an employee's professional activity at the end of an employment contract to prevent that employee from working for a competing company.

Despite the specificity of the activities of the financial sector, it seems that the common law of noncompetition clauses applies.

Thus, such a clause may be provided for by a collective agreement, in which case it is a conventional non-compete obligation. To be enforceable, the employee must have been informed of the existence of the applicable collective agreement. In this case, article 35 of Chapter I of Title IV of the national collective bargaining agreement for financial markets of 11 June 2010 provides for a non-compete obligation.

The non-compete clause is, in the majority of cases, contractual (ie, present in the employee’s employment contract). To be valid, this clause must meet various cumulative conditions to be compatible with the principle of freedom to work.

It must be essential to the protection of the legitimate interests of the company, limited in time and space, take into account the specificities of the employee's job, and include an obligation for the employer to pay the employee meaningful financial compensation. All these conditions are cumulative, and the employer cannot unilaterally extend the scope of the clause, otherwise it is null and void. Given the specificity of the activity of companies in the financial services sector, the condition of protection of the legitimate interests of the company would be met. However, taking into account the specificities of the employee's job may undermine such a clause if it is proven that his or her training and experience would prevent him or her from finding a job. The company's interest in imposing a noncompete clause must therefore be demonstrated.

The judge may restrict the application of the non-compete clause by limiting its effect in time, space or other terms when it does not allow the employee to engage in an activity consistent with his or her training and experience. However, the scope of application of the clause cannot be reduced by the judge if only the nullity of the clause has been invoked by the employee. If the non-compete clause is not enforced, the employer may take summary proceedings against the former employee who does not respect it, and also against the employee's new employer if they were hired with full knowledge of the facts, or if they continue to be employed after learning of the clause.

The employer may waive the clause if this is explicit and results from an unequivocal will. In the specific case of contractual termination, the employer who wishes to waive the clause must do so no later than the termination date set in the agreement.

Finally, concerning the non-solicitation clause, such a clause can be concluded between two companies through a commercial contract. These companies mutually prohibit each other from hiring their respective employees. Therefore, this clause is distinct from a non-compete clause and does not meet its conditions of validity. However, it must be proportionate to the legitimate interests to be protected given the purpose of the contract.

Post-contractual non-compete obligations will typically only be binding when a severance payment is agreed upon that amounts to at least 50% of the pro-rated annual remuneration that the employee received before the obligation comes into force). It is advisable to regularly review for which roles such arrangements are agreed upon as they can be costly, and a unilateral waiver does not automatically eliminate the obligation to pay compensation, only if sufficient advance notice is given.

In the financial services sector, the severance payment for non-competition covenants is considered variable remuneration and subject to the same regulatory compensation rules (for example, section 5 paragraph 6 sentence 1 IVV, section 6 paragraph 4 No. 2 Investment Firm Remuneration Ordinance). However, severance payments do not have to be factored into the ratio of variable to fixed remuneration according to section 25a paragraph 5 sentences 2 to 5 KWG if, subject to section 74 paragraph 2 of the German Commercial Code, the payments do not exceed the total fixed remuneration originally owed.

There are no particular rules that apply concerning the use of post-termination restrictive covenants for employees in the financial services sector. The rules concerning post-termination restrictive covenants are governed by common law principles in which they will only be enforced if the restriction is necessary for the protection of the employer’s legitimate business interest and is reasonable in scope and duration.

Post-termination non-competes are not enforceable, as they are treated as a restraint of trade. Courts have given prevalence to the livelihood of the employee over the employer’s interests. However, a reasonable non-solicit restriction may be enforceable in India.[1]

Employees in financial services are also bound by post-employment (for both resignation and retirement) obligations.[2] RBI employees[3] who cease to be in service should not accept or undertake “commercial employment”[4] for one year from the date on which they cease to be in service without the prior approval of the concerned authority. For SEBI employees[5], the cooling-off period is also one year. “Commercial employment”[6] broadly includes employment in any company or setting up their own practice without having professional qualifications and relying only on official experience. Such engagement may bestow an unfair advantage upon clients by virtue of the ex-employees’ prior experience at the organisation. The grant of prior approval by the concerned authority is dependent on whether there is any ensuing conflict of interest from such engagement.

No there are no bespoke rules that apply. Post termination restrictions in Ireland are void as being in restraint of trade unless it can be shown that the restrictions are necessary to protect an employer's legitimate proprietary interest and they are proportionate and reasonable in their scope and duration to achieve that protection[i].

[i] Law as of 15 April 2024

The IoM FSA does not regulate the use of post-termination restrictive covenants for employees in the financial services sector. Post-termination restrictive covenants will be a matter of contract and will typically include non-compete, non-solicitation and non-dealing restrictions. These are subject to the same common law rules on interpretation and enforceability as in any other sector. Restraint of trade provisions are, in principle, contrary to public policy as a result of which it is for the employer to justify the length and scope of the restrictive covenant and show that it goes no further than necessary to protect its legitimate business interests. If a restraint is considered to be excessive, the courts will not generally rewrite or modify it to make it enforceable and, therefore, the whole of a defective covenant could fall away or be of no effect.

There are no particular rules or legal provisions concerning the use of post-termination restrictive covenants. Nevertheless, it is common practice to execute termination agreements with officers and general managers whereby non-disclosure, non-compete and non-solicitation provisions are set forth by the parties. The use of non-compete and non-solicitation provisions in termination agreements is only recommended for very specific employees and must be negotiated when the employment is terminated.

Plain non-compete and non-solicitation provisions binding employees after termination are not enforceable under Mexican law, because the Mexican Constitution grants individuals the right to perform any job, industry, commerce or work as long it is legal and not prohibited by a judicial or governmental decision.

Post-employment non-compete obligations, which are treated as an exception, must be agreed upon in connection to specific activities that may be deemed unfair competition, and may be enforced with economic compensation.

The period of enforceability must be proportional to:

• the number of years of employment;
• the level of information and importance of the position;
• the economic compensation; and
• the scope of the non-compete obligations.

Unfair competition and solicitation – either for business, or to induce other individuals to leave the company, while the employment contract between an individual and employer is in effect – may be considered misconduct. This misconduct is a cause of termination without notice for the company, and therefore it is feasible to enforce it.

The terms and conditions must be specifically addressed in writing, within the employment termination agreement, making express reference to the importance of the information, potential competition, activities that may be deemed unfair competition, intellectual property, and commercial advantages. The compensation paid is usually similar to or above the income of the employee while he or she was active with the company. Clawback and damages payments for breach of contract are standard practices.

There are no particular rules that apply concerning the use of post-termination restrictive covenants for financial services employees.

Singapore law in relation to post-termination restrictive covenants is of general application and not specific to the financial services sector. Such restraints are prima facie void, but may be valid and enforceable if they are reasonable (both in the interests of the parties and the public), and if they go no further than what is necessary to protect a party’s legitimate proprietary interest.

The Singapore Courts have recognised that an employer has legitimate proprietary interests in its trade connections (commonly protected by restraints against the solicitation of clients or customers); the maintenance of a stable, trained workforce (commonly protected by restraints against the poaching of employees); and its confidential information and trade secrets (commonly protected by confidentiality restraints). This is not a closed list.

Non-competition clauses are however relatively more difficult to enforce as compared to other restrictive covenants, and they may not be enforceable at all under Singapore law as it presently stands if an employer’s legitimate proprietary interests are already covered by other restraints. Even then, it may still be possible for the employer to obtain an ex parte interim injunction for non-competition though.

Guidelines on restrictive covenants are also expected to be released in the second half of 2024, which will look to shape norms and provide employers and employees with guidance regarding the inclusion and enforcement of restrictive covenants in employment contracts. 

There are no particular rules that apply concerning the use of post-termination restrictive covenants for employees in the financial services sector in Switzerland. Rather, general post-contractual non-compete regulations come into play: the parties of an employment contract may agree on a non-compete clause, which must be included in the employment contract in writing to be valid. For the non-compete clause to be relevant, it must be sufficiently limited in terms of time, place and subject matter. Normally, the duration of a post-termination non-compete clause is no more than one year; however, the statutorily permissible duration is three years.

As a prerequisite for a contractual non-compete clause to be binding, access to sensitive data is required. The employee must either have access to customer data or manufacturing or business secrets. However, access alone is not enough. There must also be the possibility of harming the employer using this knowledge.

If a relationship between the customer and the employee or employer is personal (which is, for example, the case for lawyers or doctors), a post-termination non-compete clause is not applicable according to the Federal Supreme Court.

If there is an excessive non-compete clause, this can be restricted by a judge. In practice, most of the time, no restriction of the post-termination non-compete clause is imposed if the employer offers consideration in return for the agreement. The prohibition of competition may become invalid for two reasons. Firstly, the clause can become irrelevant if the employer has no more interest in maintaining the non-compete clause. Secondly, the clause is not effective if the employer has terminated the employment relationship. However, this does not apply if the employee has given the employer a reason to terminate the employment relationship.

Swiss employment law does not provide for any compensation for a post-termination non-compete clause.

The DFSA and FSRA Rulebooks do not regulate the use of post-termination restrictive covenants. It is fairly typical for financial services firms in both free zones to include non-dealing, non-solicitation, non-compete and similar restrictive covenants in their employment contracts. These are subject to the same common law rules on interpretation and enforceability as in any other sector.  In addition, whilst the courts in both the DIFC and ADGM will award injunctive relief, there is no similar right in the federal courts.  This means that the enforceability of an injunctive order outside of the geographic scope of the two free zones is uncertain.

The SM&CR does not regulate the use of post-termination restrictive covenants for employees in the financial services sector. It is fairly typical for financial services firms in the UK to include non-dealing, non-solicitation, non-compete and similar restrictive covenants in their employment contracts. These are subject to the same common law rules on interpretation and enforceability as in any other sector. The only caveat to this is that firms should ensure that such terms do not include any provision that might conflict with the regulatory duties of either the firm or the employee. This will be a rare occurrence in practice for most types of restrictive covenant, but could arise in respect of post-termination contractual obligations that are closely associated with restrictive covenants, namely those relating to confidentiality. As such, firms should ensure that confidentiality clauses in employment contracts or other agreements such as NDAs include appropriate carve-outs.

The enforceability of restrictive covenants varies greatly depending on applicable state law. Many states impose specific requirements or limitations on enforceable covenants.

FINRA-regulated firms must comply with additional regulations:

• FINRA rules prohibit interference with a customer’s choice to follow a former representative during a change in employment where there is no existing dispute with the customer about the account. The FINRA-registered agent must help transfer a customer’s account in the event of such a customer request. Note that this only explicitly affects requests by customers and not solicitation by a representative. A non-solicit provision might be upheld whereas a non-compete might not.

• Broker-dealer firms that are signatories to the Protocol for Broker Recruiting are subject to additional requirements. Under this protocol, a departing employee may be permitted to take certain information regarding clients they serviced while at the firm to a new employer and use that information to solicit clients. Non-signatories are not bound to this protocol and can sue departing brokers for violating the terms of otherwise enforceable covenants.

Non-competes and so-called garden leave provisions are regularly included in termination documents. The enforceability of these covenants vary based on jurisdiction, with courts evaluating provisions based on duration and geographic scope.

New York

New York law disfavours non-compete agreements as a general rule. However, such agreements may be enforceable if the restrictions are reasonable and are intended to protect a legitimate interest. A court can enforce a non-compete only if the covenant:

• is no greater than required to protect an employer’s legitimate interests;
• does not impose undue hardship on the employee;
• does not cause injury to the public; or
• is reasonable in duration and geographic scope.

California

California law does not allow post-employment non-compete or non-solicit agreements except agreements involving the sale or dissolution of a business. California law protects employer confidential information and prohibits current or former employees from using employer confidential information in the solicitation of employees.