HB3213 would substantially revise the Illinois Freedom to Work Act by prohibiting employers, beginning January 1, 2026, from entering into any covenant not to compete or covenant not to solicit with any employee. The bill declares such agreements entered into on or after that date illegal and void, and it bars employers or former employers from trying to enforce them even if the contract was signed or the employment occurred outside Illinois. It also updates definitions and makes conforming changes throughout the Act.
The bill goes beyond a simple ban by repealing several existing provisions that currently govern when restrictive covenants may be used, including provisions tied to legitimate business interest, employee notice, and judicial reformation of overbroad covenants. It also preserves and cross-references existing carveouts and special rules for certain contexts, while making the overall policy shift toward a near-total ban on noncompete and nonsolicitation agreements for employees starting in 2026.
Impact
HB3213 would amend multiple sections of the Illinois Freedom to Work Act, primarily Sections 5, 10, and 15, and repeal Sections 7, 20, and 35. In practical terms, it would eliminate employers’ ability to use noncompete and nonsolicitation agreements with employees for agreements entered into on or after January 1, 2026, and would make those agreements void and unenforceable regardless of where they were signed or where the work was performed. The bill would also remove statutory language that currently allows courts to consider legitimate business interest and reform covenants, thereby narrowing employer enforcement tools and expanding employee mobility.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of committee testimony or recorded votes in the provided materials, the available record suggests a policy direction favoring employee mobility and limiting restrictive employment contracts. The sponsor’s framing and the bill’s structure indicate a strong pro-worker, anti-noncompete approach. Because there are no transcripts or vote results included, there is no documented committee or floor sentiment to assess beyond the bill’s clear legislative intent.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely to be the bill’s sweeping prohibition on both noncompete and nonsolicitation agreements, which would significantly reduce employers’ ability to protect customer relationships, confidential business interests, and workforce stability through contract. Employers and business groups would likely object to the elimination of existing exceptions and the repeal of reformation and legitimate-business-interest standards, while employee advocates would likely support the broader ban as a way to improve wages, job mobility, and competition for labor. Another likely issue is the bill’s application to agreements regardless of where they were signed or where employment occurred, which could raise concerns from multistate employers about extraterritorial reach.