Noncompete vs. Nonsolicit in Michigan: What Really Limits Your Next Job

Career mobility looks very different today than it did a generation ago. Employees change jobs more frequently, industries evolve faster, and opportunities often come from competitors or startups in the same space. In Michigan, however, job changes are increasingly complicated by restrictive agreements that follow employees long after they leave an employer.

Noncompete and nonsolicitation clauses have become far more common in Michigan employment. They now appear not just in executive contracts, but in everyday employment paperwork for sales professionals, managers, recruiters, healthcare workers, and technical employees. Many workers don’t realize they agreed to post-employment restrictions until they are preparing to leave—or until a former employer threatens enforcement.

Understanding the difference matters before you resign, before you’re terminated, and certainly before you accept a new offer. The wrong assumption at the wrong time can derail a job transition, delay a start date, or trigger costly legal disputes that could have been avoided with proper review.

The Landscape of Restrictive Covenants in Michigan

Restrictive employment agreements

Restrictive covenants are contractual provisions that limit what an employee can do after leaving a job. In Michigan, these agreements are common, enforceable in certain circumstances, and frequently misunderstood.

Restrictive covenants typically include one or more of the following:

• Noncompete agreements that limit where or for whom you can work
• Nonsolicitation clauses that restrict contact with customers, clients, or coworkers
• Confidentiality provisions tied to post-employment conduct

Common situations where employees first encounter these clauses

Many employees assume restrictive agreements apply only to executives or new hires. In reality, they often appear at multiple points during employment, including:

• New hire paperwork
  
  • Offered on a take-it-or-leave-it basis
  • Signed quickly, often without explanation
• Promotions or raises
  
  • Introduced as a condition of advancement
  • Framed as routine or “updated” paperwork
• Severance or separation agreements
  
  • Included after termination
  • Paired with financial pressure to sign quickly

What Is a Noncompete Agreement?

A noncompete agreement restricts an employee’s ability to work for a competitor or start a competing business after employment ends. These restrictions typically apply for a defined period of time and within a defined geographic area.

Employers usually claim noncompetes are necessary to protect:

• Customer relationships
• Confidential or proprietary information
• Training or specialized knowledge
• Market position or goodwill

In practice, noncompetes often reach far beyond those stated goals and can prevent employees from accepting otherwise lawful job opportunities.

What Michigan Law Allows—and Does Not

Noncompetes are permitted in Michigan, but only within strict legal limits. To be enforceable, a noncompete must protect a reasonable competitive business interest and be narrowly tailored.

Michigan law places limits on:

• Duration
  
  • How long the restriction lasts after employment ends
  • Overly long timeframes are vulnerable to challenge
• Geographic scope
  
  • The physical area where competition is prohibited
  • Broad regions with no connection to the employee’s work raise red flags
• Type of restricted work
  
  • The specific activities or roles being restricted
  • Bans that prevent all work in an industry are often unreasonable

A noncompete that goes further than necessary to protect legitimate business interests is not automatically enforceable simply because it was signed.

Common Noncompete Red Flags

Certain features appear frequently in problematic noncompete agreements, including:

• Job restrictions that bar any work in the industry
• Statewide, nationwide, or undefined geographic bans
• Restrictions unrelated to what the employee actually did
• Clauses that apply regardless of how employment ended

When a noncompete is broader than the employee’s role or responsibilities ever justified, enforcement becomes legally questionable.

What Is a Nonsolicitation Agreement?

A nonsolicitation agreement does not usually prohibit employment itself. Instead, it restricts certain conduct after employment ends.

Key differences include:

• Noncompetes restrict where you can work
• Nonsolicits restrict what you can do once you’re working

Rather than barring a new job outright, nonsolicits limit contact with specific people or entities tied to the former employer.

Types of Nonsolicitation Clauses

Nonsolicitation provisions commonly fall into several categories:

• Customer nonsolicitation: Prohibits contacting or doing business with former clients or customers
• Employee nonsolicitation: Restricts recruiting or hiring former coworkers
• Vendor or business partner restrictions: Limits contact with suppliers, referral sources, or contractors

While narrower on paper, these clauses can still significantly restrict how an employee operates in a new role.

Why Employers Prefer Nonsolicits

Employers often favor nonsolicitation agreements because they:

• Appear less restrictive than noncompetes
• Are perceived as easier to enforce
• Draw less resistance at signing

At the same time, nonsolicits can have a broader practical impact than employees expect—especially in relationship-driven industries where client contact is central to the job.

How Michigan Courts Evaluate These Agreements

Courts examine whether the restriction is no broader than necessary to protect legitimate business interests and whether it unfairly limits the employee’s ability to earn a living.

Key factors Michigan courts consider

Courts commonly analyze:

• The employee’s role
  
  • Level of responsibility
  • Access to confidential or strategic information
  • Relationship with customers or clients
• The employer’s legitimate business interests
  
  • Protection of customer goodwill
  • Confidential information or trade secrets
  • Competitive positioning
• Hardship imposed on the employee
  
  • Ability to find comparable work
  • Impact on income and career progression
• Public policy considerations
  
  • Free competition
  • Workforce mobility
  • Fairness in bargaining power

“Blue penciling” overly broad agreements

Michigan courts have the authority to:

• Modify overly broad restrictions
• Narrow time, geography, or scope
• Enforce only what is reasonable

How These Clauses Actually Affect Your Next Job

Common practical consequences employees experience

Employees frequently encounter:

• Job offers withdrawn after disclosure of restrictions
• Start dates delayed pending legal review
• Cease-and-desist letters from former employers
• Pressure placed on new employers

Industries where enforcement is more common

Restrictive covenant enforcement is especially common in:

• Sales and business development
• Healthcare and medical practices
• Staffing and recruiting
• Technology and engineering
• Financial services

In relationship-driven roles, nonsolicits can be just as limiting as noncompetes.

Why fear of enforcement can be as powerful as enforcement itself

Even unenforceable agreements can:

• Scare off potential employers
• Chill employee mobility
• Force unnecessary concessions
• Delay or derail career moves

Many disputes never reach court because the risk and uncertainty alone are enough to change an employee’s plans.

When Noncompetes and Nonsolicits Become Illegal or Unenforceable

Not every restrictive covenant is enforceable under Michigan law. Certain circumstances significantly weaken—or eliminate—an employer’s ability to enforce these agreements.

Situations that commonly undermine enforceability include:

• Lack of proper consideration
  
  • Agreements imposed after hiring without additional compensation or benefit
  • Mid-employment restrictions presented as mandatory with no exchange
• Restrictions exceeding legal limits
  
  • Excessive duration
  • Overbroad geographic reach
  • Restrictions unrelated to the employee’s actual duties
• Retaliatory or punitive enforcement
  
  • Threats made after complaints, leave requests, or protected activity
  • Use of restrictive covenants to punish rather than protect
• Conflicts with public policy or employee rights
  
  • Restrictions that effectively bar an employee from earning a living
  • Clauses that interfere with legally protected rights or competition

What Employees Should Do Before Leaving a Job

The most common—and most damaging—mistake employees make is waiting too long to review restrictive agreements.

Smart steps to take before resigning or accepting a new role include:

• Reviewing all signed agreements, not just what HR highlights
• Looking for restrictive language in:
  
  • Employment contracts
  • Offer letters
  • Bonus plans
  • Severance or separation agreements
• Avoiding assumptions about enforceability based on:
  
  • What coworkers say
  • Online advice
  • How rarely the agreement was mentioned
• Seeking legal review before:
  
  • Giving notice
  • Accepting a competing role
  • Launching a new business

Know What Really Follows You to Your Next Job

Not all job restrictions are created equal. Two agreements may look similar on paper, but their real-world impact on your career can be very different. A clause labeled “nonsolicitation” can sometimes be more limiting than a noncompete, while a broadly written noncompete may be far less enforceable than an employer claims.

Contact Batey Law Firm, PLLC

If you are facing a noncompete or nonsolicitation agreement—or are unsure whether an old agreement can limit your next job—experienced Michigan employment attorney Scott Batey can help you understand your rights and options before a problem escalates.

Batey Law Firm, PLLC
30200 Telegraph Rd., Suite 400
Bingham Farms, MI 48025
📞 248-540-6800
📧 sbatey@bateylaw.com