Ohio Non-Compete Law in 2026: What Is Enforceable, What Changed, and What to Do

Every few months a headline announces that non-competes are over. In 2024 it was the FTC rule. In 2025 it was Ohio's Senate Bill 11. In 2026 it is the trickle of states that have passed their own limits, and the resulting assumption that Ohio must have done the same. People sign offer letters, give notice, and accept competing jobs on the strength of that assumption, and then receive a cease-and-desist letter from a lawyer who has read the actual law.

This post is the state of play in Ohio as of October 2026. The longer treatment of how Ohio courts analyze non-competes covers the doctrine in more depth. This one is about what is true right now, what is pending, and what to do if you are holding an agreement.

The Law Today: Raimonde and Reasonableness

Ohio non-compete law is judge-made. The controlling case is Raimonde v. Van Vlerah, 42 Ohio St.2d 21 (1975), in which the Ohio Supreme Court held that a covenant not to compete is enforceable to the extent it is reasonable, and that a court may modify an unreasonable covenant and enforce the modified version. A restriction is reasonable if it is no greater than required to protect the employer's legitimate interests, does not impose undue hardship on the employee, and is not injurious to the public.

Raimonde listed the factors courts weigh: the duration and geographic scope of the restriction; whether the employee was the employer's sole contact with the customers; whether the employee has confidential information or trade secrets; whether the covenant eliminates ordinary competition or only unfair competition; whether it stifles the employee's inherent skill and experience; whether the benefit to the employer is disproportionate to the detriment to the employee; whether it bars the employee's sole means of support; whether the skill the employee is restricted from using was acquired during the employment; and whether the restricted activity is merely incidental to the main employment.

Half a century later those are still the questions. A one-year, same-territory restriction on a salesperson who was the face of the account book is routinely enforced. A two-year nationwide restriction on an hourly employee with no customer relationships and no confidential information is routinely narrowed or found unreasonable. Most agreements fall in between, and the analysis is specific to the job, the industry, and what the employee actually knew and did.

Courts Narrow Rather Than Void

The feature of Ohio law that matters most to employees is that an overbroad covenant is not a nullity. Raimonde rejected the older rule under which a court either enforced a covenant as written or struck it entirely, and adopted the approach of modifying the agreement to what is reasonable and enforcing that. An employer who drafts a five-year, fifty-state non-compete has not written an unenforceable contract. It has written a contract a court will cut down to something like one year and the employee's actual territory, and enforce in that form.

The practical consequence is that the question for an employee is rarely "is this enforceable" and almost always "what would a court actually impose." That is a narrower restriction than the one on the page, but it is not nothing, and planning a job move around the assumption that the agreement is void is the most common and most expensive mistake people make.

What Has Not Changed: Senate Bill 11

Senate Bill 11 was introduced in the Ohio Senate in February 2025 with bipartisan sponsors. As introduced, it would make non-compete agreements with workers void and unenforceable, define "worker" broadly to include employees, independent contractors, interns, and others, give workers a private right of action against employers who try to enforce prohibited agreements, and apply to agreements entered into or modified after its effective date.

The bill drew heavy opposition in committee from the Ohio Chamber of Commerce, the Ohio Hospital Association, and the Ohio Business Roundtable, among others, and the sponsors indicated they would work on a substitute version. As of this writing, no substitute has been enacted and the bill remains pending. Ohio would be only the fifth state with a comprehensive ban if it passed, and the business community's opposition suggests that a narrower bill, perhaps limited by income or industry, is the more likely path if anything moves.

Two points for anyone holding an agreement. First, a pending bill changes nothing. Until it is signed and takes effect, the Raimonde analysis applies. Second, even as drafted the bill would reach only agreements entered into or modified after its effective date. An agreement signed today would, on the bill's own terms, remain governed by current law unless it is later amended.

What Has Not Changed: The FTC Rule

The FTC's 2024 rule would have banned most employee non-competes nationwide. A federal district court in Texas set the rule aside in August 2024 in Ryan LLC v. FTC, holding that the agency lacked authority to issue it. The FTC appealed, then in September 2025 moved to dismiss its own appeal, and in early 2026 formally removed the rule from the Code of Federal Regulations.

The FTC has said it will continue to challenge abusive non-competes through individual enforcement actions under Section 5 of the FTC Act, and it has brought a small number of such cases against specific employers. That is a tool against particular companies, not a rule any employee can invoke. For an Ohio employee, the federal picture in 2026 is the same as it was in 2023: state law governs.

What Has Changed: The Rest of the Country

The reason the headlines keep coming is that other states have moved. California, Minnesota, North Dakota, and Oklahoma ban employee non-competes outright. A larger group, including Illinois, Washington, Oregon, Colorado, Virginia, Maryland, and the District of Columbia, limits them by income threshold, notice requirement, or both. Several states have added or expanded those limits in the last two years.

That matters to Ohio employees in two ways. If you are moving to one of those states, the agreement's choice-of-law clause and the destination state's public policy may collide, and some states refuse to enforce out-of-state non-competes against their residents. And if your employer is headquartered in one of those states while you work in Ohio, the agreement may be governed by a law more favorable than Ohio's. Both are questions the agreement itself answers, in the governing law and forum clauses that most people skip.

What to Do With Yours

Before signing, treat the non-compete as a term of the offer, because it is one. Employers negotiate scope, duration, and territory far more often than employees ask, and a request to limit the restriction to your actual role and territory, or to add a carve-out for a layoff or a termination without cause, is routine at the offer stage and nearly impossible after. The employment contract review is designed for this moment.

After leaving, or before giving notice, the sequence matters. Read the agreement for what it actually restricts, which is often narrower than the summary you remember. Check for a non-solicitation clause, which is usually the more enforceable and more practical restriction. Check the governing law and forum clauses. Do not take documents, customer lists, or files with you, because misappropriation turns a weak non-compete case into a strong trade secrets case. And do not rely on a layoff or termination to release you, because in Ohio it does not.

If the employer sends a cease-and-desist letter, do not ignore it and do not answer it yourself. The letter is the first move in a process that can end in a temporary restraining order, and the response sets the terms of everything that follows. The seven arguments that actually work in Ohio are the starting point for that response.

The Bottom Line

Ohio non-compete law in 2026 is what it was in 2024: a reasonableness test applied by judges who narrow overbroad agreements rather than void them, with continued employment as sufficient consideration and no release on layoff. Senate Bill 11 is a proposal, the FTC rule is gone, and the states that have banned non-competes are not this one. If you are holding an agreement, plan around what a court would actually enforce, negotiate scope while you still can, and get the governing law clause read before you assume another state's rules help you.

Frequently Asked Questions

Are non-competes enforceable in Ohio in 2026?

Yes, when they are reasonable. Ohio has no statute banning or limiting employee non-competes. Courts apply the reasonableness test from Raimonde v. Van Vlerah: the restriction must be no greater than needed to protect the employer's legitimate interests, must not impose undue hardship on the employee, and must not injure the public. A covenant that fails the test is narrowed to what is reasonable and enforced in that form, rather than thrown out.

Did Ohio ban non-competes?

No. Senate Bill 11, introduced in February 2025, would void most worker non-competes entered into or modified after its effective date. As of October 2026 it remains in committee and has not been enacted. Until a bill is signed and takes effect, it changes nothing about an existing agreement.

Is the FTC non-compete ban in effect?

No. The FTC's 2024 rule was set aside by a federal court in August 2024, the FTC dropped its appeal in September 2025, and the agency formally removed the rule from the Code of Federal Regulations in early 2026. The FTC has said it will pursue individual enforcement actions against abusive non-competes under Section 5 of the FTC Act, but there is no federal rule that voids non-competes generally.

Does being laid off void my non-compete in Ohio?

No. Ohio courts generally enforce a reasonable non-compete regardless of whether the employee quit, was fired, or was laid off. The circumstances of the separation are a factor in the reasonableness analysis and in the equities of an injunction, and a layoff can make a court less willing to impose hardship, but it does not release you from the agreement by itself.

Can an employer make me sign a non-compete after I have already started?

Yes. The Ohio Supreme Court held in Lake Land Employment Group of Akron v. Columber that continued at-will employment is sufficient consideration for a non-compete signed after the employment began. You do not have to receive a raise, a bonus, or anything new for the agreement to be binding.

How long can a non-compete last in Ohio?

There is no statutory limit. Courts evaluate duration together with geographic scope and the activities restricted. One year is commonly upheld, two years is often upheld for sales and management roles, and longer periods are scrutinized closely. A court that finds the duration too long can shorten it rather than void the agreement.