It depends on your income — Washington generally treats non-competes as void against employees who earn less than an annually-adjusted threshold (roughly $126,859 for employees and $317,147 for independent contractors in 2026), and enforceable above it only with several added requirements: disclosure no later than the time of the job offer, and a presumption that anything longer than 18 months is unreasonable. Under RCW 49.62 — enacted in 2020 — the law asks first whether a worker earns enough to be subject to a non-compete at all; for workers above the threshold, the statute layers in procedural and substantive requirements. The specifics depend on your situation, and these figures change every year.
This framework is meaningfully different from California's blanket ban or Massachusetts's garden-leave model.
Are non-competes enforceable in Washington?
It depends mostly on what you earn. Under RCW 49.62, enacted in 2020, Washington generally treats a non-compete as void and unenforceable against an employee earning less than an annually-adjusted income threshold, and enforceable above that threshold only when several added requirements are met. For 2026 the Department of Labor & Industries lists roughly $126,859 for employees and $317,147 for independent contractors, and those figures are adjusted for inflation every year, so it often helps to confirm the current numbers at the source for the year that applies to you. Above the threshold the statute layers on more: written disclosure no later than the time of the job offer, independent consideration for a mid-employment agreement, a presumption that anything longer than 18 months is unreasonable, and pay during the restricted period after a layoff. Your own contract and earnings decide most of it. What RCW 49.62 generally provides:
- Income threshold: Under RCW 49.62.020 (employees) and RCW 49.62.030 (independent contractors), the law generally treats non-competes as void and unenforceable against people earning less than the annually-adjusted threshold. For 2025, the threshold was approximately $123,000+ for employees and $307,000+ for independent contractors (the Department of Labor & Industries adjusts these for inflation each year under RCW 49.62.040 — for 2026 L&I lists roughly $126,859 for employees and $317,147 for independent contractors; check the current figure for your year).
- Disclosure timing: RCW 49.62.020 generally requires that pre-employment non-competes be disclosed in writing no later than the time of the job offer. For mid-employment non-competes, the statute generally requires independent consideration beyond continued at-will employment.
- Duration cap: The statute generally presumes a non-compete longer than 18 months to be unreasonable; an employer would typically have to prove by clear and convincing evidence that a longer duration is reasonable.
- Layoff carve-out: Where an employee is terminated as part of a layoff, RCW 49.62.020 generally makes the non-compete 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: The statute generally treats provisions requiring a Washington-based employee to adjudicate the non-compete outside Washington, or under non-Washington law, as void.
- Statutory remedies: RCW 49.62.080 generally 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 generally not covered by the income-threshold rule, but are typically still subject to common-law reasonableness.
What should you say?
What people say usually names one specific defect in the agreement rather than arguing about the non-compete as a whole. Under RCW 49.62 the defects that come up most often are earnings below the annually-adjusted threshold, disclosure that arrived after the offer had already been accepted, and a separation that was part of a layoff. A message about earnings generally states the earnings figure for the relevant period alongside the threshold for that year. A message about disclosure timing generally states the date the non-compete was first disclosed and the date the offer was accepted, because RCW 49.62.020 generally requires disclosure no later than the time of the offer. A message about a layoff generally asks whether the employer will pay base salary during the restricted period or treat the non-compete as void. Whether any of them fits depends on your specific agreement and earnings. Three ways people frame it in writing:
When earnings were below the threshold:
"Under RCW 49.62, non-competes are generally 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 appears unenforceable."
When the disclosure timing may have been wrong:
"The non-compete in my employment agreement was first disclosed to me on [date], after I had already accepted the offer on [date]. RCW 49.62.020 generally requires that pre-employment non-competes be disclosed no later than the time of the offer. The agreement appears unenforceable for failure to meet the disclosure timing requirement."
When you were laid off:
"I was terminated as part of a reduction in force on [date]. Under RCW 49.62.020, a non-compete is generally 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 should you document?
The documents that matter are the ones that establish which part of RCW 49.62 applies to you and whether the employer met its requirements. The agreement itself, with the signature page and date, sets the terms and the moment they were signed. The offer letter and the date of acceptance sit next to it, because the disclosure-timing rule generally turns on whether the non-compete was disclosed no later than the time of the offer. Earnings records for the relevant period establish whether earnings fell below the annually-adjusted income threshold, which is often the first question. The circumstances of separation matter separately, since the statute generally treats a layoff differently from a resignation or a termination for cause. Anything the former employer has sent about enforcement rounds out the picture, because it shows what is actually being claimed. What many people gather:
- 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 should you escalate?
The usual trigger is a former employer actually attempting to enforce — a letter to you, a letter to your new employer, or a threat of suit. At that point many people in Washington consult a Washington employment attorney as soon as they can, because the income-threshold and disclosure defects under RCW 49.62 are often dispositive, though how they apply depends on your situation. The statutory remedies matter to that conversation: RCW 49.62.080 generally allows an employee to recover actual damages or a $5,000 statutory penalty, whichever is greater, plus attorney's fees, when an employer attempts to enforce a void non-compete, which can make an enforcement attempt expensive for the employer. A new employer often shares counsel or defends jointly, and local ordinances can add requirements on top of the state statute. What many people in Washington do:
- Consult a Washington employment attorney as soon as possible. The income-threshold and disclosure defects under RCW 49.62 are often dispositive, though how they apply depends on your situation.
- The statutory penalty ($5,000 or actual damages) plus attorney's fees that RCW 49.62.080 generally provides can make 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; it often helps to check local rules as well.
Washington's framework generally gives a clear floor — many workers are not subject to non-competes at all because they fall below the income threshold. For those above it, the procedural requirements the statute imposes (disclosure timing, layoff compensation) are common defects that can defeat enforcement. Your agreement and circumstances may differ.
Official sources
- Washington State Department of Labor & Industries — Non-Compete Agreements (current income thresholds, adjusted annually)
- Washington State Legislature — RCW Chapter 49.62 — Noncompetition Covenants
- Washington State Legislature — RCW 49.62.020 — When void and unenforceable (income threshold, disclosure timing, duration cap, and layoff compensation for employees)