The CHOICE Act raises the legal bar for employee mobility, compelling companies to revise restrictive covenants or risk unenforceable agreements, which could expose trade secrets and increase talent turnover costs.
The Florida legislature passed the Contracts Honoring Opportunity, Investment, Confidentiality and Economic Growth (CHOICE) Act as a response to growing concerns that traditional non‑compete clauses were insufficient to shield businesses from aggressive talent poaching. By July 1 2025, the law will require any non‑compete executed thereafter to conform to one of two newly defined agreement templates, each tailored to highly compensated employees whose departure could jeopardize proprietary information or client relationships. This shift reflects a broader national trend toward more precise, enforceable restrictive covenants that balance employee mobility with legitimate business interests.
Employers now face a narrow compliance window to revise existing covenants before the July deadline. The CHOICE Act imposes stricter criteria, such as explicit compensation thresholds, duration limits, and geographic scope tied directly to the employee’s role, and it empowers courts with accelerated injunction powers for violations. Companies that fail to align their agreements risk having them deemed unenforceable, exposing trade secrets and increasing litigation exposure. Legal counsel recommends conducting a comprehensive audit of all restrictive agreements, incorporating the Act’s template language, and documenting the business justification for each restriction.
The upcoming Littler webinar on April 8, 2026 offers a practical roadmap for navigating these new requirements, featuring drafting tips, enforcement insights, and a Q&A with seasoned employment law partners. Participants will also learn about pending SHRM and CLE certification credits, adding professional development value. As more states consider similar reforms, early adoption of the CHOICE framework can give companies a competitive edge, ensuring their talent protection strategies remain robust while minimizing disruption to workforce planning.
Comments
Want to join the conversation?
Loading comments...