People often confuse this with a non-solicitation agreement. A non-solicitation clause limits a worker from contacting former customers, clients, or coworkers for competing business after leaving a job. Non-compete agreement enforceability is broader: it is the question of whether a court will actually uphold a contract term that bars someone from working for a competitor, starting a competing business, or doing similar work in a certain area for a certain time.

Enforceability usually turns on reasonableness. Courts look at whether the restriction protects a legitimate business interest, such as confidential information or customer relationships, and whether its time, geography, and scope go further than necessary. A clause that is too broad may be narrowed or rejected, depending on the state and the facts.

In practice, enforceability matters when a worker is threatened with a lawsuit, denied a new job opportunity, or fired after refusing to sign an overly restrictive contract. It can also shape a claim for wrongful termination, retaliation, or lost wages if an employer uses a non-compete to pressure someone unfairly.

In New Mexico, non-competes are generally judged under reasonableness principles, but some are barred by statute. For example, the New Mexico Healthcare Practitioner Non-Compete Act (2015), NMSA 1978, Section 24-1I-2, makes many non-compete clauses for healthcare practitioners void. That can directly affect available remedies and a worker's ability to mitigate damages after leaving a job.