Washington takes an income-threshold approach to non-compete enforceability. RCW 49.62 — enacted in 2020 — makes non-competes unenforceable against employees who earn less than an annually-adjusted threshold. For workers above the threshold, several procedural and substantive requirements apply.
This framework is meaningfully different from California's blanket ban or Massachusetts's garden-leave model. Washington asks first whether you earn enough to be subject to a non-compete at all.
The rule, in plain terms
- Income threshold: Non-competes are unenforceable against employees earning less than the annually-adjusted threshold. For 2025, the threshold is approximately $123,000+ for employees and $307,000+ for independent contractors (adjusted annually for inflation by the Department of Labor & Industries; check current figures).
- Disclosure timing: Pre-employment non-competes must be disclosed in writing no later than the time of the job offer. Mid-employment non-competes require independent consideration beyond continued at-will employment.
- Duration cap: Non-competes are presumed unreasonable if longer than 18 months. The employer must prove by clear and convincing evidence that a longer duration is reasonable.
- Layoff carve-out: If the employee is terminated as part of a layoff, the non-compete is enforceable only if the employer pays the equivalent of the employee's base salary during the restricted period (less any earnings from other employment).
- Choice of law and venue: Provisions requiring the employee to adjudicate the non-compete outside Washington or under non-Washington law are void.
- Statutory remedies: RCW 49.62.080 allows the employee to recover actual damages or a statutory penalty of $5,000, whichever is greater, plus attorney's fees, when an employer attempts to enforce a void non-compete.
- Customer non-solicits — outside the income threshold: Customer non-solicitation agreements are not covered by the income-threshold rule, but are still subject to common-law reasonableness.
Scripts to use
When your earnings are below the threshold:
"Under RCW 49.62, non-competes are unenforceable against employees earning less than the annually-adjusted threshold. My earnings during the relevant period were $[amount], which is below the [year] threshold of $[amount]. The non-compete in my agreement is unenforceable."
When the disclosure timing was wrong:
"The non-compete in my employment agreement was first disclosed to me on [date], after I had already accepted the offer on [date]. Under RCW 49.62.020, pre-employment non-competes must be disclosed no later than the time of the offer. The agreement is unenforceable for failure to comply with the disclosure timing requirement."
When you were laid off:
"I was terminated as part of a reduction in force on [date]. Under RCW 49.62.060, a non-compete is enforceable against a laid-off employee only if the employer pays compensation equivalent to my base salary during the restricted period, less earnings from other employment. Please confirm whether the employer will provide that compensation or treat the non-compete as void."
What to document
- The non-compete agreement, with the signature page and date
- The job offer letter and the date you accepted
- Your earnings (W-2, pay stubs) for the relevant period
- The circumstances of separation (voluntary, terminated for cause, terminated without cause, laid off)
- Any communications from the former employer about enforcement
When to escalate
If a former employer attempts to enforce a non-compete:
- Consult a Washington employment attorney as soon as possible. The income-threshold and disclosure defects under RCW 49.62 are often dispositive.
- The statutory penalty ($5,000 or actual damages) plus attorney's fees makes enforcement attempts economically costly for the former employer.
- The new employer often shares counsel or jointly defends.
- Seattle and other municipalities may have additional ordinances; check local rules.
Washington's framework gives a clear floor — most workers are not subject to non-competes at all because they fall below the income threshold. For those above, the procedural requirements (disclosure timing, layoff compensation) are common procedural defects that defeat enforcement.
Educational content only — not legal advice. Employment law varies by jurisdiction and situation. Consult a qualified employment attorney for advice specific to your circumstances.