A Democratic bill with 1 Republican cosponsor · See the cosponsor
Last activity — Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Education and Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The Workforce Mobility Act of 2026 aims to prohibit the use and enforcement of most noncompete agreements. The bill finds that these agreements restrict worker mobility, reduce wages, and slow innovation. While the general rule bans these agreements, exceptions are made for the sale of a business and partnership dissolutions. It also allows for specific noncompete agreements for senior executive officials under certain conditions. Employers may still use trade secret and nondisclosure protections to protect their interests. Enforcement is handled by the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Labor.
Yes· 3 of 8
- Scored +5
Is this likely to grow the economy?
The bill seeks to boost productivity and innovation by removing barriers to worker mobility.
- Scored +4
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
Removing noncompetes can facilitate wage growth and easier job transitions for low-income workers.
- Scored +4
Would middle-income households be better off under this?
The bill aims to increase wages and mobility for the broader workforce.
The opposite
- Scored -3
Would business owners be better off under this?
The bill restricts how business owners can protect themselves during sales or dissolutions.
- Scored -2
Would high-income households be better off under this?
Senior executives may face more restrictions on their severance and noncompete negotiations.
- Scored -2
Does this make it easier to run a small business?
The ban may limit some methods for business owners to protect their interests during sales or partnerships.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Increased Wage Growth and Mobility: The bill seeks to foster stronger wage growth and prevent workers from being forced to idle or leave their industries (Section 2).
-
Protection of Employment Options: By prohibiting noncompete agreements, the bill aims to prevent the broad restriction of employment options for workers (Section 2).
-
Preservation of Trade Secrets: The act does not stop employers from using agreements to protect trade secrets, allowing individuals to be bound by non-disclosure requirements regarding such information (Section 4).
-
Legal Recourse for Workers: Individuals who are victims of prohibited agreements can bring civil actions in court to recover actual damages, court costs, and reasonable attorney's fees (Section 6(e)).
-
Access to Enforcement: Workers have access to enforcement through the Federal Trade Commission, the Department of Labor, and State attorneys general (Section 6).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Restrictions on Business Sales: A seller of a business entity may be restricted from carrying on a similar business within a specific geographic area after a sale (Section 3(b)(1)(A)).
-
Limitations on Senior Executives: Senior executive officials may be subject to noncompete agreements for up to one year as part of a sale and severance agreement (Section 3(b)(1)(B)).
-
Restrictions on Partners: Partners in a partnership may be restricted from carrying on a similar business within a specified geographic area upon the dissolution of the partnership (Section 3(b)(2)).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Removing noncompetes can facilitate wage growth and easier job transitions for low-income workers. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — The bill aims to increase wages and mobility for the broader workforce. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Increased wage growth and mobility benefits mid-career professionals. Would union members be better off under this? — Greater mobility and wage potential align with union interests. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Increased labor mobility benefits those starting their careers. Would business owners be better off under this? — The bill restricts how business owners can protect themselves during sales or dissolutions. Would high-income households be better off under this? — Senior executives may face more restrictions on their severance and noncompete negotiations.
- Economy And Finance
- Is this likely to grow the economy? — The bill seeks to boost productivity and innovation by removing barriers to worker mobility. Is this likely to create jobs? — By increasing worker mobility, the bill may help match workers to more productive opportunities. Does this make it easier to run a small business? — The ban may limit some methods for business owners to protect their interests during sales or partnerships.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill expands the regulatory and enforcement authority of the FTC and DOL.
- 9/1/2026
- Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Education and Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in House
3 bills Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Thomas KeanRepublican · New Jersey