Non-competition and non-solicitation agreements, as a general matter, restrict an employee from working for a competitor of, or soliciting the employees or customers of, their former employer for a period of time after their employment ends. The proponents of non-competition and non-solicitation agreements argue that they help keep markets and industries fair by restricting companies from stealing each other’s employees solely to obtain the confidential information of their competitors. They also argue that these clauses are especially important to small and medium sized businesses, who are susceptible to poaching by larger competitors, or in industries that derive a substantial portion of their revenue form their trade secret and other proprietary information (e.g., software companies).

Detractors of non-competition and non-solicitation clauses argue that the clauses prohibit employees from earning a livelihood and prohibit employees from pursuing higher paying jobs. While the clauses usually limit the employee from working for an employer’s competitor, an employee who spends years in a given field or industry is most qualified for employment in that same field or industry and, as a result, may wind up working for a competitor. Therefore, the existence of a non-competition clause could severely limit the available employment opportunities of a departing employee.

While Missouri Courts will uphold non-competition agreements that protect legitimate business interests, they will not uphold those that impose unreasonable restrictions.  Non-competition and non-solicitation agreements are among the most contentious and hotly contested cases between an employer and employee.