Employee Poaching and Raiding in California: What Is Legal and What Is Not

Last updated: November 2026

Poaching employees is generally legal in California. A competitor commits no actionable wrong by merely soliciting or hiring another company's at-will employees; the former employer must prove an independently wrongful act to recover. (Reeves v. Hanlon (2004) 33 Cal.4th 1140 [17 Cal.Rptr.3d 289, 298].) Contract clauses barring former employees from recruiting their old colleagues are, in most cases, void as restraints on a lawful profession. Kolmogorov Law, P.C. represents employers on both sides of these disputes in Orange County, Los Angeles, and across California.

Call (909) 235-6116 or contact us online if a competitor is recruiting your staff or you have been accused of raiding.

The general rule: competing for talent is lawful

California's policy favors employee mobility. A contract restraining anyone from engaging in a lawful profession, trade, or business is void to that extent. The statute now directs courts to read that rule broadly in the employment context, no matter how narrowly a restriction is drawn. (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 16600, subds. (a), (b)(1).) Employees who are free to leave are free to be recruited.

The California Supreme Court applied that policy to raiding claims. An employer suing a competitor for luring away at-will employees must plead and prove an independently wrongful act that induced the employees to leave. The act must be one proscribed by some constitutional, statutory, regulatory, common law, or other determinable legal standard. A job offer is not such an act. (Reeves v. Hanlon, supra, 33 Cal.4th 1140 [17 Cal.Rptr.3d 289, 298].)

That is where every call on this subject starts. A rival hiring your three best salespeople is a business problem. It becomes a legal problem only when something else happened along the way.

Employee non-solicitation clauses in California

Many employment agreements contain a clause barring the employee, for a year or two after leaving, from soliciting or recruiting the company's other employees. These clauses were long assumed to be enforceable because they did not stop the employee from working.

In 2018 the Court of Appeal held such a clause void. The clause barred former recruiters from soliciting their old employer's employees for a year, and the court found it restrained them from practicing their chosen profession. The court also doubted that older authority permitting these clauses survived the Supreme Court's rejection of any reasonableness test. Later decisions have not followed that reasoning in every setting. The trend, though, is against enforcement. The 2024 amendments raise the stakes. It is now unlawful to include a noncompete clause in an employment contract that does not satisfy a statutory exception. (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 16600.1, subd. (a).) An employer that attempts to enforce a contract void under the chapter commits a civil violation and owes the prevailing employee's attorney fees. (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 16600.5, subds. (d), (e).) Whether every employee non-solicit is a clause of that kind has not been settled by the Supreme Court, but the risk now runs against the employer.

My advice to employers is to treat an employee non-solicit as unenforceable. Rely instead on the tools that work: confidentiality agreements, trade secret protection, and the duty of loyalty. The non-compete guide covers the statutory exceptions, including the sale of a business, and our page on customer non-solicitation agreements covers the customer side.

When poaching becomes actionable

The independently wrongful act requirement is a real limit, but it is met more often than defendants expect. The recurring categories are these.

Breach of fiduciary duty. Officers, directors, and managers owe the company a duty of loyalty. While still employed, they may not organize a group departure, recruit subordinates for the competitor, or line up the company's clients for a new venture. Planning to leave is permitted. Using a position of trust to hollow out the employer before leaving is not. Our guide on breach of fiduciary duty explains the duty.

Misuse of trade secrets. Using the former employer's confidential compensation data, performance reviews, or organizational plans to target recruits is misappropriation if that information meets the statutory definition. (Civ. Code, § 3426.1, subd. (b).) So is recruiting employees as a means of acquiring the secrets they carry.

Inducing breach of an enforceable contract. An employee under a fixed-term contract is not at will, and inducing that employee to walk away from the term can be interference with contract. Our page on tortious interference covers the elements.

Deception and sabotage. False statements to employees about the former employer's finances, deleting files on the way out, or timing a mass resignation to cripple a project can supply the wrongful act.

Three situations we see

A vice president of sales accepts a competitor's offer and, during his last month, holds one-on-one meetings with each account executive about "opportunities." Eight leave within a week of his departure. The claim is breach of fiduciary duty, and the evidence is the calendar.

A competitor hires two engineers through a public job posting and a recruiter. Nobody took anything. The former employer sends a demand letter citing an employee non-solicit. There is no claim, and the letter may itself be an attempt to enforce a void contract.

A staffing agency's departing recruiter uses the agency's internal database of contractor pay rates to approach the contractors with better offers. The claim is trade secret misappropriation, with the recruiting as the use.

Claims and remedies

Where a wrongful act exists, the former employer's claims are intentional interference with at-will employment relations, breach of fiduciary duty, trade secret misappropriation, and unfair competition. Remedies include the cost of replacing the departed employees, lost profits tied to the departures, and an injunction against continued use of confidential information. A court will not enjoin the employees from working for the competitor on the basis of a void restraint.

For the hiring company, the defense begins with a clean record. Public postings, outside recruiters, no use of the former employer's data, and written instructions to new hires not to bring anything with them. Our departing employee protocol page describes what the former employer will be looking for.

Where these cases are heard

Raiding disputes are filed in the Superior Court: the Central Justice Center in Santa Ana for Orange County, the Stanley Mosk Courthouse for Los Angeles. A federal trade secret claim can bring the case to the Central District of California.

What to bring to the first meeting

Bring the employment agreements of the people who left, their resignation dates and new roles, and any evidence of pre-departure recruiting such as calendar entries, messages, and meeting notes. If you are the hiring company, bring your recruiting records and the onboarding instructions you gave the new hires.

Frequently asked questions

Is poaching employees illegal in California?

Usually not. Soliciting or hiring a competitor's at-will employees is lawful unless someone commits an independently wrongful act along the way. Using trade secrets, breaching a fiduciary duty, or deceiving the employees are the usual examples. (Reeves v. Hanlon (2004) 33 Cal.4th 1140 [17 Cal.Rptr.3d 289, 298].) Better pay and a better job are not wrongful.

Are employee non-solicitation agreements enforceable in California?

In the employment context, generally no. The Court of Appeal has held a clause barring former employees from recruiting their old colleagues void under section 16600, and the statute now directs courts to read it broadly to void employment noncompetes no matter how narrowly tailored. (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 16600, subd. (b)(1).) Not every court has applied that reasoning to every non-solicit, and clauses tied to the sale of a business are treated differently.

Can I sue a competitor for hiring my employees?

Only if you can prove an independently wrongful act that induced the employees to leave. A job offer is not enough. A claim can rest on evidence that the competitor used your confidential information, recruited through an officer still on your payroll, or induced breaches of fixed-term contracts.

Can a manager recruit coworkers before leaving?

A manager who owes the company a duty of loyalty may plan a departure. The manager may not use the position to recruit subordinates for a competitor while still employed. That conduct supports a breach of fiduciary duty claim against the manager and may expose the new employer that participated in it.

Talk to a California employment litigation attorney

If a competitor is recruiting your staff with your own information, or you have been accused of raiding, call (909) 235-6116 or contact us online. Kolmogorov Law, P.C. is at 327 Magnet, Irvine, CA 92618, and represents employers in Orange County, Los Angeles, and throughout California. See also our employment litigation page.

This page provides general information about California law and is not legal advice. Outcomes depend on the agreements, the conduct of the people who left, and the court.