New York 2025-2026 Regular Session

New York Assembly Bill A10023

Introduced
1/28/26  

Caption

Prohibits non-compete agreements and certain restrictive covenants

Summary

This bill would add a new section to the New York Labor Law generally prohibiting employers from seeking, requiring, demanding, or accepting non-compete agreements from most workers. It defines a “covered individual” broadly to include workers who are economically dependent on an employer, while excluding “highly compensated individuals” earning at least $500,000 annually, adjusted for inflation starting in 2027. The bill also separately bars non-competes for a wide list of licensed health-related professionals, including physicians, nurses, pharmacists, dentists, chiropractors, physical therapists, psychologists, and others. The bill makes any prohibited non-compete agreement void and unenforceable, and it creates a private right of action for affected workers. Courts could void the agreement, issue injunctions, award lost compensation and compensatory damages, and grant attorneys’ fees and costs. It also sets liquidated damages of up to $10,000 per affected worker and requires employers to post notice of these rights, with the Department of Labor tasked with creating a model notice. The bill preserves certain other lawful restrictions, such as confidentiality, trade secret, client-solicitation, exclusivity, and fixed-term service provisions, so long as they do not function as prohibited competition restraints. The bill would significantly change New York law by codifying a broad ban on post-employment non-compete clauses for most workers and by limiting enforceable restrictive covenants to narrow exceptions, including certain business-sale transactions and otherwise permissible agreements that meet common-law reasonableness standards. It also restricts choice-of-law and venue clauses that would evade New York’s protections for residents or workers employed in the state, including some remote workers tied to a New York worksite or supervisor. The measure applies prospectively only to contracts entered into or modified after the effective date. The available legislative record shows the bill was introduced and referred to the Assembly Committee on Labor, with no recorded votes or committee transcript excerpts provided. Based on the bill’s content, the likely policy sentiment is worker-protective and pro-mobility, especially for lower- and middle-wage employees and health professionals who may be constrained by non-competes. The absence of recorded debate or votes means there is no documented opposition in the provided materials, but the main points of potential contention are the breadth of the ban, the high-compensation carveout, the treatment of business-sale covenants, and whether employers need non-competes to protect trade secrets, client relationships, and investment in training.

Impact

The bill would amend the Labor Law by adding section 191-d and a new section 45 notice requirement, creating a statewide prohibition on most non-compete agreements and certain restrictive covenants. It would also establish enforcement mechanisms, including a private right of action, damages, attorneys’ fees, and mandatory employee notice, while preserving limited exceptions for business sales and certain narrowly tailored restrictive covenants that remain lawful under New York common law.

Sentiment

No committee transcript or vote data is provided, so there is no direct record of legislative debate or roll-call sentiment. The bill’s design indicates a generally pro-worker, anti-noncompete policy approach, with particular protection for health care and other economically dependent workers. The measure appears intended to increase job mobility and bargaining power, while still allowing some employer protections in limited contexts.

Contention

The most likely points of contention are the scope of the ban and the exceptions. Employers may object that the bill is too broad and could weaken protection of trade secrets, client relationships, and investments in employee training, while worker advocates are likely to support the ban as necessary to prevent labor-market lock-in. Additional debate may focus on the $500,000 high-compensation threshold, the special treatment of health-related professionals, the business-sale exception, and the enforceability of out-of-state choice-of-law or venue clauses for New York workers.

Companion Bills

NY S09759

Same As Prohibits non-compete agreements and certain restrictive covenants; authorizes covered individuals to bring a civil action in a court of competent jurisdiction against any employer or persons alleged to have violated such prohibition.

Previously Filed As

NY S09759

Prohibits non-compete agreements and certain restrictive covenants; authorizes covered individuals to bring a civil action in a court of competent jurisdiction against any employer or persons alleged to have violated such prohibition.

NY A10981

Prohibits non-compete agreements for certain medical professionals; authorizes covered individuals to bring a civil action in a court of competent jurisdiction against any employer or persons alleged to have violated such prohibition.

NY S09228

Prohibits non-compete agreements for certain medical professionals; authorizes covered individuals to bring a civil action in a court of competent jurisdiction against any employer or persons alleged to have violated such prohibition.

NY SB142

Prohibiting enforcement of covenants not to compete in broadcast employment agreements.

NY SF559

Certain restrictive covenants removal fees prohibition

NY A02456

Prohibits employers from requiring low-wage employees to enter into covenants not to compete; requires employers to notify potential employees of any requirement to enter into a covenant not to compete.

NY SB957

Relating to restrictive covenants in health care provider agreements; declaring an emergency.

NY SB1218

L&E; covenants not to compete prohibited, low-wage employees, exceptions, civil penalty.

NY SB1318

Relating to restrictions on covenants not to compete for physicians and certain health care practitioners.

NY H5902

Prohibits restrictive covenants related to grocery stores.

Similar Bills

SD HB1088

Remove the requirement that counties remit to municipalities an amount equal to the road levy for calendar years 1984, 1985, and 1986.

CA AB1391

Education finance: transitional kindergarten: funding for basic aid school districts and necessary small schools.

CA SB834

An act to amend Section 1203.

NJ A2823

Establishes "Internet Predator Investigation and Prosecution Fund" with $200 assessment on persons convicted of certain offenses.

NJ S1546

Requires additional fines for certain crimes against minors to fund Amber Alert system.

CA SB1342

Criminal records: relief.

MO SB817

Authorizes a tax credit for certain charitable donations

CA AB2526

Special education local plan areas: apportionments: alternate assessments.