Non-solicitation clauses: narrower, and more likely to hold
What most employers actually need, and what courts are most willing to enforce.
Esshaki Legal Media TeamCurrent as of March 2025
An employer worried about a departing employee usually fears one of two things:
the customers leaving, or colleagues following. Non-solicitation clauses address
each directly and face a lower hurdle than a non-compete, because they restrict
conduct rather than employment.
Customer non-solicitation. Most defensible when limited to customers the
employee actually dealt with or learned confidential information about, during a
defined recent period, for a duration matched to how long the relationship or
information stays current. A clause covering every customer of the business,
including those the employee never knew existed, invites the same overbreadth
analysis a non-compete faces.
The solicitation/acceptance distinction. Some clauses prohibit soliciting;
others also prohibit accepting business from a covered customer who approaches
unprompted. The second is broader, closer in effect to a non-compete, and less
reliably enforced. Drafting should be deliberate about which is intended.
Employee non-solicitation. Restricting recruitment of former colleagues.
Generally enforceable when reasonable in scope and duration, though some
jurisdictions scrutinize agreements that restrict worker mobility more closely
than they once did.
Practical point. Pair either with a well-drawn confidentiality clause. The
information is usually the real asset, and a confidentiality obligation does not
depend on a court’s view of reasonable duration and geography.