As readers of this blog know, we track restrictive covenant legislation around the country, and have been doing so for years.
While we are currently finalizing our comprehensive review of restrictive covenant legislation pending in 2026, it is still too early in the year. But we’ll have that full report to you soon.
In the meantime, there is a significant development in Massachusetts regarding three bills filed last year that are now seeing movement.
The Three Bills in Play
There are currently three bills pending, each of which was filed last year:
Veterinarian Bill: A Senate bill that, if passed, would prohibit noncompetes for certain veterinarians.
Total Ban: A Senate bill reflecting the perennial effort to completely ban noncompetes across the Commonwealth.
Consideration Requirement: A House bill that, if passed, would modify the law to link the requirement of “other mutually-agreed upon consideration” to be “reasonably related to the requirements of the garden leave clause.”
Recent Hearings and Testimony
The Joint Committee on Labor and Workforce Development held two hearings on these three bills late last year:
October 8, 2025: This hearing covered many bills, including the bill to prohibit noncompetes for certain veterinarians.
November 17, 2025: This hearing addressed (among many other bills) the total ban and the consideration requirement.
I am sure that no one reading this will be surprised that I testified (at 42:44) at November hearing. At the conclusion of that testimony, I was asked to submit written testimony, which (again, no surprise) I did. That testimony is available here.
Current Status: Moving to Ways and Means
Following those hearings, two of the bills (the two Senate bills) were reported favorably out of committee on December 22, 2025, and referred to the Senate Ways and Means Committee:
The House bill to link garden leave with “other mutually-agreed upon consideration” remains at the Joint Committee on Labor and Workforce Development.
Looking Ahead
If a total ban were to become law, there would be no need for the veterinarian bill, as the prohibition on that category of noncompetes would be redundant. As some of you may recall, we saw a similar “dual-track” approach in Rhode Island last year, which ended with Governor McKee vetoing the total ban and later providing his rationale for the veto.
What will happen in Massachusetts?
Time will tell.
But we’ve had the Massachusetts Noncompetition Agreement Act (the MNAA) for over seven years, and, while not perfect, it seems to have helped curb many of the abuses. So, is a total ban needed? Not from what I have seen. And while I am not a fan of noncompetes, I actually think that a total ban would be counterproductive for workers, companies, and the economy — but I don’t get a vote.
2026 will be interesting.
Stay tuned!
* * *
*A huge thank you (as always) to Erika Hahn for all of her extraordinary help in tracking and monitoring all of the bills around the country and here in Massachusetts, and making sure I was aware of and attended the relevant hearings in Massachusetts.