The Workforce Mobility Act of 2025 would broadly prohibit noncompete agreements in employment and contractor relationships affecting commerce. It makes such agreements unenforceable if entered into after enactment, and it defines a noncompete agreement to include restrictions on working for another person for a period of time, in a geographic area, or in similar work after the relationship ends.
The bill includes limited exceptions. It would allow noncompetes in connection with the sale of a business or ownership interest, and in certain partnership dissolution or dissociation situations. It also permits agreements protecting trade secrets and allows notice and public-awareness requirements for covered employers. The bill assigns enforcement to the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Labor, authorizes state attorneys general to sue on behalf of residents, creates a private right of action for aggrieved individuals, and bars predispute arbitration agreements and class-action waivers for alleged violations.
Impact
If enacted, the bill would significantly change federal labor and competition policy by overriding the enforceability of most post-employment noncompete clauses nationwide. It would affect employers, employees, independent contractors, business purchasers, partnerships, and state enforcement officials, while preserving narrower protections such as trade secret nondisclosure agreements and certain sale-of-business restrictions. The bill also directs the FTC and Labor Department to issue regulations and coordinate enforcement, and it would create new litigation and compliance obligations for covered businesses.
Sentiment
The bill’s findings and structure reflect a strongly pro-worker, pro-mobility approach, emphasizing higher wages, innovation, and labor-market freedom. The available context shows no committee transcript or recorded votes, so there is no documented floor or committee opposition in the provided materials. Based on the text alone, the bill appears designed to attract support from lawmakers concerned about worker mobility and competition, while anticipating resistance from employers that use noncompetes to protect business interests.
Contention
The main point of contention is the bill’s broad ban on noncompetes versus employers’ interest in protecting customer relationships, investments in training, and confidential information. Supporters argue that trade secret law, nondisclosure agreements, and other targeted remedies are sufficient, while critics are likely to focus on the loss of a common tool for retaining employees and safeguarding goodwill. The exceptions for business sales, senior executives, and partnerships suggest an attempt to balance those concerns, but the scope of the prohibition and the ban on arbitration/class-action waivers could still be controversial.
Labor: fair employment practices; certain noncompete agreements; prohibit employers from requiring employees to enter into unless certain conditions are met. Amends sec. 4a of 1984 PA 274 (MCL 445.774a).