Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) jointly introduced the Workers' Right To Compete Act, a bipartisan bill that would ban companies from imposing non-compete agreements on employees earning less than $100,000 annually [1]. The legislation would prohibit both future and pre-existing non-compete agreements within 30 days of passage, allowing workers previously bound by such contracts to seek new employment opportunities [1]. Khanna emphasized the bipartisan appeal of the measure, noting alignment between Vice President JD Vance, Luna, and himself on the issue, suggesting potential for post-election unity [1].
Proponents argue that non-compete agreements restrict worker mobility and economic growth. Luna stated that "independent contractors and hardworking Americans deserve the freedom to continue advancing their careers and earn the money they deserve without unnecessary legal red tape" [1]. Khanna pointed to empirical evidence supporting the bill, citing KKR & Co.'s experience with prohibiting non-competes for employees under $100,000, which "improved the economic performance of the companies" with "no negative impact" [1]. Additionally, a 2021 Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis study found that when Oregon ended enforcement of non-competes for hourly workers, "wages for those workers rose by 2–3%" [1]. Khanna acknowledged he would prefer a higher income threshold but chose the $100,000 level as a pragmatic starting point to achieve meaningful legislation [1].
CONCLUSION
The bipartisan Workers' Right To Compete Act represents a rare point of agreement between Republicans and Democrats on labor policy, with evidence suggesting non-compete bans could increase worker wages and improve company performance. If passed, the legislation could significantly reshape employment practices for millions of American workers earning under $100,000 annually, potentially benefiting companies like KKR that have already adopted similar policies.