Don`t worry. The Texas Supreme Court stated in the Mann Frankfort case that the agreement to provide confidential information may be implied if the type of work of the employee necessarily requires access to confidential information. While over the past decade we`ve seen huge legal developments in Texas that improve an employer`s ability to impose non-compete rules, there`s still no inoperable way to get an enforceable non-compete clause at the time of termination. The best regulation – and one that is not yet verified in court – is to encourage the worker to decide for himself, not to show up. For employers who want to try to get restrictions on the employment relationship during the layoff phase, here are the keys that improve the applicability of the agreement: If you design a non-compete clause for an employee working in Texas, can you improve the chances of enforcing the non-compete clause by separating a legal choice clause to choose the law of another state? I don`t have much experience with non-competitors who are related to a garden vacation, but it`s an idea that employers should at least consider. The problem, in a nutshell, is reflection. If the employee already works for the company and has already received confidential information, what is the new counterpart of the non-competition clause? First, you probably won`t find a state significantly more favorable than Texas for non-competitors. There are some things about Texas law that are favorable to the employee, such as the fact that you can`t get damages for violating an overly broad non-compete clause (see #6) and the prohibition of industry exclusions (see #9) But overall, Texas law is relatively pro-competitive. (3) The nature of the activities to be limited must be indicated. Yes, a non-competition clause may be applicable if it simply states that the worker cannot “compete” with the employer, but a lack of specificity may be posed to the employer who drafted the non-competition clause when a given activity is unlikely to be in competition. .