Employment & Worker Protection · Massachusetts
Massachusetts Non-Competition Agreement Act
M.G.L. c. 149 sec. 24L - enacted in Massachusetts.
- Status
- Enacted
- Enacted
- 2018
- States with employment & worker protection laws
- 51
- Massachusetts tracker score
- 48/100 Above median
The bottom line
Massachusetts Non-Competition Agreement Act is an enacted law in Massachusetts, part of a mature, broadly-adopted employment & worker protection landscape.
- Enacted
- effective 2018-10-01
- 51
- states have employment & worker protection laws
- 107/107
- employment & worker protection laws enacted nationally
- 48/100
- Massachusetts tracker score
Data compiled 2026-03-18 from the official Massachusetts legislative record linked below; laws can be amended or repealed after this date.
Category catalog share · regulations
How 107 tracked employment & worker protection records split by state
Exclusive Massachusetts vs other-state counts in this category (sum to the category total). Orthogonal to the peer scatter below, which plots enacted volume against portal tracker score.
Regulatory Snapshot: Massachusetts Non-Competition Agreement Act
Massachusetts Non-Competition Agreement Act (M.G.L. c. 149 sec. 24L) is an enacted law in Massachusetts under the Employment & Worker Protection category. It was enacted on 2018-08-10 and becomes effective on 2018-10-01. Massachusetts currently has 6 regulations tracked here, with 6 records marked enacted in this dataset. PlainRegWatch's tracker score is 48/100; it summarizes coverage within the five categories this site tracks and is not an official state rating. PlainRegWatch compiled this entry's data on 2026-03-18; consult the linked official source for the current, authoritative text.
Nationally, 107 employment & worker protection statutes have been enacted and 0 additional bills remain pending - 51 distinct jurisdictions have codified rules in this area so far. That places Massachusetts within a mature and broadly adopted employment & worker protection landscape where compliance programs typically hinge on definitions in M.G.L. c. 149 sec. 24L itself.
Applicability under Massachusetts Non-Competition Agreement Act: All MA employers. Penalty exposure is documented as: Void provisions severed. Injunctive relief. Aggrieved employee may sue for declaratory relief. Notable exemptions: Non-competition via sale of business. Physician non-competes (void)..
Summary
Massachusetts limits non-competes to employees with duties-aligned scope. Maximum 1 year (1.5 years for breach). Garden leave or equivalent required.
Key Requirements
- Max 1 year (1.5 for breach).
- Garden leave required (50% base pay for duration) or equivalent consideration.
- 10-day pre-employment notice.
- Prohibited for non-exempt, students, hourly.
Penalties
- Void provisions severed.
- Injunctive relief.
- Aggrieved employee may sue for declaratory relief.
Applicability
- All MA employers.
Exemptions
- Non-competition via sale of business.
- Physician non-competes (void).
Category context
How Massachusetts sits among employment & worker protection peers
51 states have a tracked record in employment & worker protection ; Massachusetts ranks #15 by portal tracker score among those peers. Each point is one state with at least one employment & worker protection regulation in this archive.
Read the peer-state figures
- California: 6 enacted of 6 tracked employment & worker protection records, tracker score 100/100.
- Colorado: 5 enacted of 5 tracked employment & worker protection records, tracker score 76/100.
- Texas: 1 enacted of 1 tracked employment & worker protection record, tracker score 69/100.
- Connecticut: 4 enacted of 4 tracked employment & worker protection records, tracker score 62/100.
- Illinois: 5 enacted of 5 tracked employment & worker protection records, tracker score 62/100.
- Minnesota: 3 enacted of 3 tracked employment & worker protection records, tracker score 62/100.
- New York: 5 enacted of 5 tracked employment & worker protection records, tracker score 62/100.
- Oregon: 6 enacted of 6 tracked employment & worker protection records, tracker score 62/100.
- Washington: 5 enacted of 5 tracked employment & worker protection records, tracker score 62/100.
- Delaware: 2 enacted of 2 tracked employment & worker protection records, tracker score 59/100.
- Virginia: 2 enacted of 2 tracked employment & worker protection records, tracker score 59/100.
- Utah: 1 enacted of 1 tracked employment & worker protection record, tracker score 55/100.
- Florida: 2 enacted of 2 tracked employment & worker protection records, tracker score 48/100.
- Maryland: 2 enacted of 2 tracked employment & worker protection records, tracker score 48/100.
- Massachusetts (this state): 5 enacted of 5 tracked employment & worker protection records, tracker score 48/100.
- New Jersey: 3 enacted of 3 tracked employment & worker protection records, tracker score 48/100.
- Rhode Island: 2 enacted of 2 tracked employment & worker protection records, tracker score 48/100.
- Vermont: 3 enacted of 3 tracked employment & worker protection records, tracker score 48/100.
- Alabama: 2 enacted of 2 tracked employment & worker protection records, tracker score 34/100.
- District of Columbia: 3 enacted of 3 tracked employment & worker protection records, tracker score 34/100.
- Hawaii: 3 enacted of 3 tracked employment & worker protection records, tracker score 34/100.
- Maine: 2 enacted of 2 tracked employment & worker protection records, tracker score 34/100.
- Nevada: 4 enacted of 4 tracked employment & worker protection records, tracker score 34/100.
- North Dakota: 2 enacted of 2 tracked employment & worker protection records, tracker score 34/100.
- Oklahoma: 2 enacted of 2 tracked employment & worker protection records, tracker score 34/100.
- Pennsylvania: 2 enacted of 2 tracked employment & worker protection records, tracker score 34/100.
- Indiana: 1 enacted of 1 tracked employment & worker protection record, tracker score 31/100.
- Iowa: 1 enacted of 1 tracked employment & worker protection record, tracker score 31/100.
- Kentucky: 1 enacted of 1 tracked employment & worker protection record, tracker score 31/100.
- Montana: 1 enacted of 1 tracked employment & worker protection record, tracker score 31/100.
- Nebraska: 1 enacted of 1 tracked employment & worker protection record, tracker score 31/100.
- New Hampshire: 1 enacted of 1 tracked employment & worker protection record, tracker score 31/100.
- Tennessee: 1 enacted of 1 tracked employment & worker protection record, tracker score 31/100.
- Arizona: 1 enacted of 1 tracked employment & worker protection record, tracker score 28/100.
- Louisiana: 1 enacted of 1 tracked employment & worker protection record, tracker score 28/100.
- West Virginia: 1 enacted of 1 tracked employment & worker protection record, tracker score 28/100.
- Alaska: 1 enacted of 1 tracked employment & worker protection record, tracker score 17/100.
- Arkansas: 1 enacted of 1 tracked employment & worker protection record, tracker score 17/100.
- Georgia: 1 enacted of 1 tracked employment & worker protection record, tracker score 17/100.
- Idaho: 1 enacted of 1 tracked employment & worker protection record, tracker score 17/100.
- Kansas: 1 enacted of 1 tracked employment & worker protection record, tracker score 17/100.
- Michigan: 1 enacted of 1 tracked employment & worker protection record, tracker score 17/100.
- Mississippi: 1 enacted of 1 tracked employment & worker protection record, tracker score 17/100.
- Missouri: 1 enacted of 1 tracked employment & worker protection record, tracker score 17/100.
- New Mexico: 1 enacted of 1 tracked employment & worker protection record, tracker score 17/100.
- North Carolina: 1 enacted of 1 tracked employment & worker protection record, tracker score 17/100.
- Ohio: 1 enacted of 1 tracked employment & worker protection record, tracker score 17/100.
- South Carolina: 1 enacted of 1 tracked employment & worker protection record, tracker score 17/100.
- South Dakota: 1 enacted of 1 tracked employment & worker protection record, tracker score 17/100.
- Wisconsin: 1 enacted of 1 tracked employment & worker protection record, tracker score 17/100.
- Wyoming: 1 enacted of 1 tracked employment & worker protection record, tracker score 17/100.
Dashed lines mark the peer averages in this category. The tracker score summarizes enacted records across all five policy areas PlainRegWatch tracks; it is not enforcement strength or legal burden. Read how tracker scores are computed.
Tracker-score ranking on employment & worker protection
Top peer states by portal tracker score among jurisdictions with a employment & worker protection record in this archive.
| # | State | Tracker score |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | California | 100 |
| 2 | Colorado | 76 |
| 3 | Texas | 69 |
| 4 | Connecticut | 62 |
| 5 | Illinois | 62 |
| 6 | Minnesota | 62 |
| 7 | New York | 62 |
| 8 | Oregon | 62 |
| 9 | Washington | 62 |
| 10 | Delaware | 59 |
Read with Massachusetts Non-Competition Agree…
Nearest employment & worker protection volume peers and same-state archive siblings for this ENACTED · DENSE row.
ENACTED DENSE
Illinois · 5 enacted
Illinois holds 5 enacted employment & worker protection rows (more by 0 than Massachusetts); tracker 62/100.
New York · 5 enacted
New York holds 5 enacted employment & worker protection rows (more by 0 than Massachusetts); tracker 62/100.
Washington · 5 enacted
Washington holds 5 enacted employment & worker protection rows (more by 0 than Massachusetts); tracker 62/100.
Colorado · 5 enacted
Colorado holds 5 enacted employment & worker protection rows (more by 0 than Massachusetts); tracker 76/100.
Massachusetts Act to Establish Pay Equity (Salary History) · ENACTED
Another Massachusetts archive row (Employment & Worker Protection) stamped ENACTED beside ENACTED Massachusetts Non-Competiti….
Massachusetts Minimum Fair Wage Law · ENACTED
Another Massachusetts archive row (Employment & Worker Protection) stamped ENACTED beside ENACTED Massachusetts Non-Competiti….
Disclaimer: This summary is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Regulation details may have changed since this data was compiled (2026-03-18). Always consult official sources and qualified legal counsel for compliance guidance.