Employment Agreement Questions Answered

Idaho generally enforces reasonable non-compete agreements. Reasonableness is evaluated based on duration (typically 1 to 2 years), geographic scope, and the scope of restricted activities. Overly broad non-competes may be reformed by courts rather than voided entirely.

California prohibits non-compete agreements under Business and Professions Code Section 16600 with very limited exceptions. Non-solicitation agreements are also restricted. The U.S. Department of Labor has proposed federal restrictions as well.

Misclassifying employees as independent contractors creates liability for back taxes, unpaid benefits, overtime, and penalties. California applies the restrictive ABC test under AB5. Idaho follows the IRS multi-factor test. See our complete guide.

Job title and responsibilities, compensation and benefits, reporting structure, performance standards, confidentiality obligations, IP assignment provisions, termination procedures, and any restrictive covenants. Clark Meyers PC drafts these with litigation awareness.

Both Idaho and California are at-will states, meaning either party can terminate the relationship at any time for any lawful reason. However, exceptions exist for implied contracts, public policy violations, and discriminatory termination.

Severance consideration (continued pay/benefits), release of claims, confidentiality, non-disparagement, cooperation obligations, and compliance with the Older Workers Benefit Protection Act for employees over 40.

Confidentiality agreements, trade secret policies, access controls, and exit procedures. Both Idaho and California have adopted the Uniform Trade Secrets Act. Proper documentation of what constitutes a trade secret is essential for enforcement.

Final paycheck timing (immediately in California, next regular payday in Idaho), COBRA notification, non-compete delivery, return of company property, and system access termination. Improper termination procedures create litigation exposure.