County Boards of Education - Appointed Members in Leadership Positions - Prohibition
Summary
HB1288 revises Maryland’s law on noncompete and conflict-of-interest provisions in employment agreements. For most covered workers, the bill would make any clause that prevents an employee, after separation, from taking a job with a new employer or becoming self-employed in the same or similar trade null and void as against public policy. The bill applies to employees earning at or below 150% of the state minimum wage, certain licensed health care workers providing direct patient care who earn up to $350,000 annually, and licensed veterinary practitioners and veterinary technicians.
For higher-paid health care workers providing direct patient care and licensed under the Health Occupations Article, the bill allows limited restrictive covenants but caps them at one year after employment ends and limits geographic restrictions to 10 miles from the primary workplace. It also preserves employers’ ability to protect client- or patient-related proprietary information and allows a former employer, on request, to notify patients of a former employee’s new practice location. The bill takes effect October 1, 2025.
Impact
The bill would amend § 3-716 of the Labor and Employment Article in the Annotated Code of Maryland by narrowing the enforceability of noncompete and conflict-of-interest provisions in employment contracts. It would expand protections for low-wage workers and certain veterinary professionals by voiding restrictive covenants outright, while imposing specific limits on restrictive covenants for certain highly compensated health care practitioners. Employers in covered industries would need to revise employment agreements and post-employment restrictions to comply with the new statutory limits.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes in the provided materials, the overall posture appears to be a policy-driven effort to limit restrictive employment covenants rather than a contested measure with documented opposition in the available record. The bill’s structure suggests support for worker mobility and patient access, while still preserving some employer protections for high-earning clinical roles and confidential client or patient information.
Contention
The main points of contention are likely to be the scope of the ban on noncompetes, the special treatment of health care workers, and the balance between employee mobility and employer retention of staff. Employers may object to the outright invalidation of restrictive covenants for lower-wage workers and veterinarians, while health care stakeholders may debate whether the 10-mile and one-year limits are sufficient or too restrictive. Patient-notification requirements and the carve-out for proprietary client or patient information may also be areas of concern for employers and providers.