Contracts of Employment

This Note explains the provisions employers and practitioners should consider when negotiating and drafting executive employment agreements. It discusses common types of compensation arrangements, severance provisions, relevant issues under the Internal Revenue Code and restrictive covenants. It also includes factors to consider when negotiating, including the more stringent regulatory environment and provisions that are viewed unfavorably by shareholders.

This Note describes trade secrets and confidential information protections available to employers. It examines trade secret definitions and legal recourse, including misappropriation, tortious interference and breach of duty of loyalty and/or fiduciary duty claims. It also explores relevant restrictive covenants and best practices. This Note provides a general overview of federal law in this area. For information on state law, see the State Law Q&A Tools under Related Content to the right.

A discussion on negotiating compensation and benefits provisions in executive employment agreements, including links to recently filed employment agreements. This Note will be updated quarterly.

An agreement between an employer and an employee concerning confidentiality and appropriate handling of the employer's commercially valuable information, compliance with relevant security rules and policies, and protection of the employer's intellectual property assets. Agreements of this type have various titles, which may use the term "non-disclosure" in place of "confidentiality," or "intellectual property" in place of "proprietary rights." This Standard Document is drafted in favor of the employer. It is based on federal law. For information on state law requirements, see the State Q&A Tools under Related Content to the right. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips.

An agreement between an employer and an employee limiting an employee's competitive activities for a specified period of time after the employment relationship ends.  This Standard Document is drafted in favor of the employer. It is jurisdiction neutral. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. For information on state law requirements regarding non-competes and trade secret laws, see the State Q&A Tools under Related Content to the right.

A model retention agreement, sometimes referred to as a stay bonus agreement, for a private employer to use when offering an employee a retention bonus for remaining with the employer until a specified date. This retention bonus agreement is based on federal law. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips.

A model term sheet for employers to use when negotiating an executive employment agreement. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips.

An independent contractor agreement between an independent contractor (a self-employed individual) and a client company for consulting or other services. This Standard Document is drafted in favor of the client company. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips.

This Standard Document provides sample language for a California-specific agreement to arbitrate employment-related claims. This Standard Document has integrated drafting notes with important explanations and drafting tips.

An offer letter to be used with an employee paid on a fluctuating workweek basis. This offer letter also can be used as a short-form employment agreement. This Standard Document is intended to be used by private employers with their nonunionized workforce. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. It is based on federal law. For information on state law requirements, see the State Q&A Tool under Related Content to the right.

A California-specific offer letter/short-form employment agreement for a non-executive specifying the terms and conditions of employment to be acknowledged and signed by the employee. It includes provisions addressing at-will, background check and credit report requirements and new pay notice requirements. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanatory and drafting tips. It is based on California law.

A sample secondment letter to be used with an employee being temporarily assigned to work for another entity in the United States, either to another business unit within the employer's organization or externally to another company. This Standard Document is intended to be used by private employers with their nonunionized workforce. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips.

A California-compliant agreement between an employer and a departing employee specifying terms of the employee's separation from employment, including a release of legal claims against the employer in exchange for a benefit. This Standard Document is drafted in favor of the employer. It is based on California law and is intended for use with employees or businesses located in California. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips.

This Standard Clause provides sample language for a California-compliant non-compete provision in connection with the merger or sale of a business, including its goodwill, as authorized by Sections 16600 to 16602.5 of the California Business and Professions Code. It can be used as a stand-alone provision or incorporated into a written agreement with the seller of a business entity. This Standard Clause has integrated drafting notes with important explanations and drafting tips.

This Standard Clause provides sample language for a California-compliant non-solicitation of employees provision. It can be used as a stand-alone provision or incorporated into a written agreement with current or departing employees. This Standard Clause has integrated drafting notes with important explanations and drafting tips.

A Checklist outlining best practices for employers drafting non-compete agreements with employees. This Checklist is jurisdiction neutral. For information on state law requirements regarding non-compete agreements, see State Q&A Tool under Related Content to the right.

A Checklist outlining steps employers can take at the beginning of the employment relationship to avoid potential claims from former employers for theft of trade secrets and unfair competition, and to protect the new employer's confidential, proprietary and trade secret information.

This tool enables subscribers to search and compare PLC's Independent Contractors State Q&A resources. Questions and answers address state-specific definitions of independent contractor, benefits of using independent contractors, tests used to assess proper classification, administration/enforcement, penalties and more. Simply select the questions and the jurisdictions that you are interested in and click the "Submit" button. To see all of PLC's State Q&As on Independent Contractors, see State Q&A Guide to Independent Contractors. To see all of PLC's State Q&As, including relevant Legal Updates since the publication date (under Related Content), see individual Q&As on the Labor & Employment State Q&As landing page.

This tool enables subscribers to search and compare PLC's Trade Secret Law State Q&A resources. Questions and answers cover state-specific definitions of trade secrets, reasonable efforts to maintain secrecy, misappropriation, defenses, remedies and more. Simply select the questions and the jurisdictions that you are interested in and click the "Submit" button. To see all of PLC's State Q&As on Trade Secret Laws, see State Q&A Guide to Trade Secret Laws. To see all of PLC's State Q&As, including relevant Legal Updates since the publication date (under Related Content), see individual Q&As on the Labor & Employment State Q&As landing page.

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Arizona. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement, as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in California. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Connecticut. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement, as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded.  Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Florida. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Idaho. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Indiana. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Kansas. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Louisiana. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Maryland. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Michigan. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Mississippi. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Nevada. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in New Jersey. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in New York. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Ohio. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Oregon. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Rhode Island. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Tennessee. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Utah. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Washington. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to release of claims agreements for private employers in Wisconsin. This Q&A addresses statutory and common law claims that may be released in a valid and enforceable written agreement as well as employment claims or specific contract language that should be included or excluded. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Employment Claims in Release Agreements: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Arizona. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in California.  This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool). For a recent update on California's agreement with the DOL to reduce misclassification of employees as independent contractors, see the Related Content section on the right-hand side.

A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Connecticut.  This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Florida. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Idaho. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Indiana. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassifcation. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Kansas. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Louisiana. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Maryland. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Michigan.  This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Missouri. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Nevada. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in New Jersey.  This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in North Carolina. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Pennsylvania.  This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Tennessee.  This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Utah. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to state law on independent contractor status for private employers in Washington. This Q&A addresses how independent contractors are classified under state law, including the various tests to evaluate worker status, penalties for misclassification and practices to avoid misclassification. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Independent Contractors: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Alabama. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in the Arkansas. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Colorado. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in the District of Columbia. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Georgia. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Illinois. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Iowa. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Kentucky. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Maryland. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answer to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Michigan. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants, such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Mississippi. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Nebraska. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in New Hampshire. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in New York. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Ohio. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). For an update on the recent decision of the Ohio Supreme Court that a merger triggers the running of a non-compete clock, see Related Content to the right.

A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Oregon. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in South Carolina. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Texas. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Virginia. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in West Virginia. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Alabama. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definitions of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in California. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Connecticut. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Florida. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definitions of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Idaho. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definitions of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Indiana. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definitions of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Kansas. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definitions of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Louisiana. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Massachusetts. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definitions of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Minnesota. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Missouri. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in New Hampshire. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in New York. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secrets Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Ohio. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Oregon. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in South Carolina. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Texas. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definitions of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). On May 2, 2013, Texas enacted the Texas Uniform Trade Secrets Act, which takes effect on September 1, 2013 and replaces the common law governing trade secret misappropriation. For a recent update on this development, see Related Content on the right.

A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Virginia. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool).

A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in West Virginia. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool).

Since the US Supreme Court's 2011 decision in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, courts have taken a variety of approaches to enforcing employment arbitration agreements. This article analyzes the state of post-Concepcion case law in California and in other parts of the country.

An expert Q&A with Andrea S. Rattner of Proskauer Rose LLP on the impact of the Dodd-Frank Act on executive employment agreements and the influence of shareholder advisory groups' proxy voting guidelines on companies that are required to submit their executive compensation programs to a say on pay vote.

This chapter considers current trends in the termination of employees, particularly in the negotiation of severance and compromise agreements, in Finland, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Italy, Spain, Sweden and the UK (England and Wales).

Resources to assist employers that are considering secondment arrangements or drafting secondment agreements.

This Law Firm Publication by Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. discusses a Wisconsin Court of Appeals decision in Engedal v. Menard, Inc., upholding an arbitration provision in an employment agreement that included a non-compete clause. After Menard, Inc. (Menards) terminated Jeffrey Engedal, he sued, requesting a declaratory judgment that the provision was unenforceable. The circuit court held the arbitration provision was unconscionable because the non-compete clause would put Engedal out of a job for two years if he refused to sign it. The Wisconsin Court of Appeals reversed, holding the circuit court's decision conflicted with its own findings that Menards would have offered Engedal a different position in the company if he refused to sign the agreement, his managerial, supervisory and organization skills were transferable outside the industry, and Engedal was subsequently able to find a job as a general manager for a company in another industry. 

This Law Firm Publication by Jackson Lewis LLP discusses Elijahjuan v. Superior Court, in which the California Court of Appeal held that owner-operator truck drivers were not required to arbitrate their state law misclassification claims. Although the parties' agreements contained a clause requiring arbitration in all disputes arising from the "application or interpretation" of the agreements, the court held that the drivers' California Labor Code claims fell outside the scope of that provision, as they concerned statutory rights rather than an interpretation of contractual rights. One justice dissented, arguing that arbitration clauses have been consistently interpreted as applying to extra-contractual disputes.

This Law Firm Publication by Jackson Lewis LLP discusses the California Court of Appeal's decision in Nelsen v. Legacy Partners Residential, Inc., ruling that an employee must arbitrate her individual wage and hour claims against her employer where an arbitration agreement between the parties was not unconscionable or in violation of public policy. Notably, the court rejected the employee’s argument that the agreement was unenforceable because it violated federal public policy under the National Labor Relations Board's (NLRB) decision in D.R. Horton. The court found that the issues in D.R. Horton were outside the expertise of the NLRB, that the holding had been rejected by at least two other federal courts, and that there was no evidence that the plaintiff in Nelsen was covered by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).

This Law Firm Publication by Jackson Lewis LLP discusses a California Court of Appeal's decision in Iskanian v. CLS Transportation upholding a class action waiver in an arbitration agreement and distinguishing the National Labor Relations Board's (NLRB) decision in D.R. Horton. The court followed AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, noting Concepcion made no exception for employment-related disputes in reiterating the general rule that arbitration agreements must be enforced according to their terms. The court also held the arbitration agreement barred the plaintiff from bringing claims under the California Private Attorney General Act (PAGA).

This Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. memorandum discusses an Executive Order requiring state agencies to issue regulations imposing caps on executive compensation and administrative costs on for-profit and not-for-profit service providers that receive State-authorized financial assistance or payments. New York's Governor, Andrew M. Cuomo, executed the Order on January 18, 2012, to prevent public funds from being diverted to excessive compensation and unnecessary administrative costs. The new limitations imposed by the Executive Order may adversely affect hospitals and other service providers especially Medicaid-managed healthcare plans.       

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) recently held that requiring employees, as a condition of employment, to sign an arbitration agreement prohibiting them from filing collective or class actions for employment-related claims violates the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). In its January 3, 2012 decision in D.R. Horton, Inc., the NLRB also held that its decision does not conflict with the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) and distinguished AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion.

A list of new California employment-related laws effective on January 1, 2012 and covering areas such as pay notices, credit checks, pregnancy disability leave and independent contractors, among others.

This Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C. memorandum discusses Reliable Fire Equipment Company v. Arredondo, in which the Illinois Supreme Court held that courts may not use rigid, structured tests in determining whether a legitimate business interest exists as they analyze the enforceability of non-competition restrictive covenants. This decision resolves a split among the Illinois appellate courts.

This Jackson Lewis LLP memorandum discusses the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit's ruling in OfficeMax, Inc. v. Levesque. Analyzing the case under Maine law, the court held that a one year non-compete clause had expired by the time the employer tried to enforce it more than a year after its predecessor in interest acquired the company that had initially obtained the non-compete agreement. The court reversed the grant of preliminary injunction and remanded the case.

This Jackson Lewis LLP memorandum discusses the August 22, 2011 California Supreme Court ruling in Seabright Ins. v. US Airways. The court held that independent contractors' employees may not sue either the contractor or the party that hired the contractor for injuries sustained on the job, even if the workplace injury was caused by the party's non-compliance with workplace safety requirements. The court reasoned that when a party hires an independent contractor, the hiring party implicity delegates any tort law duty to protect the contractor's employees by complying with workplace safety requirements.