The law comes into force on July 1, 2015. It does not affect the competition or non-compliance clauses of employment contracts concluded by technology companies before July 1, 2015.c) Notwithstanding subsection b) and without limitation of the application of subsection (a), it is lawful to conclude one of the following restrictive agreements or agreements, which fall within a legitimate purpose that is not contrary to this chapter. , unless it can essentially result in a reduction in competition or the establishment of a monopoly in one of the areas of commercial law of a part of the state. 1) an agreement or agreement between the seller of a business not to compete in appropriate territory and within a reasonable time for the sale of the business; “Unsolicited clause” is defined as a clause that “prohibits a worker from asking the employer for salaried workers after leaving the employment relationship.” Curiously, there seems to be an unresolved question as to whether the client`s unsolicited provisions are covered by the new law, although proponents of the law may argue that non-requests from clients fall under the “non-compete clause.” Non-competition agreements, also known as anti-competitive or restrictive agreements, are employment contracts used by employers to limit an employee`s ability to compete with the employer by stealing customers or trade secrets. Enforceable agreements must strike a balance between protecting the employer`s legitimate business interests from an unfair competitive advantage and the worker`s right to work in a sector for which he or she is trained. In general, the courts decide what is deemed appropriate or inappropriate by examining the nature and size of the business, the duration and geographic area of the application of the restrictions, and whether the worker received a reasonable consideration or benefit at the time the contract was signed. Employers should keep these issues in mind when asking workers to sign restrictive agreements. It is also important to know whether potential new recruits have a non-compete agreement with a former employer. In some cases, the new employer may be held liable to the former employer if the worker`s hiring was contrary to the agreement. Different rules may apply to situations in which a business is sold in whole or in part and where the buyer and seller are entitled to a restrictive agreement.
Non-competitors with other Hawaiian employees remain opposable as long as they are able to analyze the adequacy in accordance with Hawaii law. The legislature stated in the new law “that employers` business secrets are already protected by the Federal Uniform Trade Secrets Act and under Section 480-4 (c) (4), Hawaii Revised Statutes; Therefore, the benefits to the employer from competition or unsolicited agreements are dual and cross-cutting safeguards that can place undue hardship on employees of technology companies and the Hawaiian economy. Existing law allows confidentiality agreements with employees.