Nevada non-compete law: NRS 613.195 for recruiters

Nevada enforces non-competes that meet NRS 613.195, with three limits that matter to recruiters. A covenant cannot apply to an employee paid solely on an hourly wage basis. It cannot stop a former employee from serving a customer who left on their own and was not solicited. And after a layoff or restructuring, it holds only while the employer keeps paying the employee. Otherwise a covenant is valid if it is supported by valuable consideration, no broader than the employer needs, not unduly hard on the employee, and proportionate to what the employee received, and a court that finds it too broad must revise it and enforce the narrower version. That is the law as of October 2026.

General screening questions are in non-compete questions for candidates, and agency-side clauses in non-solicitation clauses for recruiters. This page covers what is specific to Nevada, including the salary history rule that limits how you can ask about it.

What does NRS 613.195 require?

Under NRS 613.195(1), a noncompetition covenant "is void and unenforceable unless" it:

1. is supported by valuable consideration;
2. does not impose any restraint greater than is required to protect the employer;
3. does not impose any undue hardship on the employee; and
4. imposes restrictions that are appropriate in relation to the valuable consideration supporting it.

The statute defines a noncompetition covenant as an agreement that, when employment ends, "prohibits the employee from pursuing a similar vocation in competition with or becoming employed by a competitor of the employer." The fourth requirement is unusual: the restriction has to be proportionate to what the employee got for it, so a long, wide covenant signed for little is exposed.

Who cannot be bound, and what cannot be restricted?

The hourly ban was added by Assembly Bill 47, approved May 25, 2021, which also barred employers from bringing an action to restrict service to customers who follow and required courts to award the employee fees in those two situations. Section 613.195 itself was added by Assembly Bill 276, approved June 3, 2017 and effective on approval. The current NRS shows no amendment to the section after 2021.

What happens if a Nevada covenant is too broad?

Section 613.195(6) is mandatory. If an employer sues to enforce a covenant, or an employee sues to challenge one, and the court finds it supported by valuable consideration but unreasonable in time, area or scope, or more restrictive than necessary, or unduly hard on the employee, "the court shall revise the covenant to the extent necessary and enforce the covenant as revised." So, as in Texas, an overbroad Nevada covenant is usually narrowed, not discarded, unless it fails for lack of consideration or falls under the hourly or customer rules.

Example only: a Las Vegas hotel sales manager on salary signed a two-year covenant covering all of Nevada in exchange for a retention bonus. A court asked to enforce it might cut it to a shorter period and Clark County, and it would still not stop the manager from serving a group client who approached them unprompted. If the manager had instead been a front-desk agent paid solely by the hour, the covenant could not apply at all.

Is it a crime in Nevada to keep someone from working elsewhere?

It can be. NRS 613.200 says that, except as provided in that section and NRS 613.195, anyone who "willfully does anything intended to prevent any person who for any cause left or was discharged from his, her or its employ from obtaining employment elsewhere in this State" is guilty of a gross misdemeanor, with a fine of up to $5,000; the Labor Commissioner may also impose an administrative penalty of up to $5,000 per violation. The section expressly allows reasonable agreements, supported by valuable consideration, not to disclose trade secrets, business methods, customer lists or confidential information. NRS 613.195(4) adds that negotiating, executing or attempting to enforce a covenant that turns out to be void under 613.195 is not, by itself, a violation of 613.200.

The practical point for agencies: calls or letters meant to keep a former worker from being hired elsewhere in Nevada, outside a valid covenant or confidentiality agreement, carry criminal and administrative exposure. Route any such concern through counsel.

Nevada non-compete rules at a glance

What should a recruiter ask a Nevada candidate?

Nevada adds a constraint: NRS 613.133 says an employer or employment agency shall not "seek the wage or salary history of an applicant." So do not ask pay questions to work out whether the hourly rule applies; let the hiring company's counsel work that out from the agreement, or through the candidate's own lawyer. The Nevada salary history ban guide covers the rule, which names employment agencies.

NEVADA CANDIDATE — restrictive agreements

1. "Have you signed a non-compete, a customer non-solicit, an employee
    non-solicit, or a confidentiality agreement?"
2. "How long does it last, and what area or customers does it cover?"
3. "What did you receive for signing it: was it part of the offer, a
    bonus, a promotion, equity?"
4. "Is your current role ending because of a layoff or restructuring?"
5. "Does it name which state's law applies?"
6. "Could the hiring company's lawyer see it, as far as it allows?"
Always: "We don't want any confidential information, documents or
client lists from your current employer." Never ask current or
past pay.

• Do not tell a candidate "hourly workers can't have non-competes" as advice about their own case. Whether they are paid "solely" hourly is a fact question for counsel.
• Do not coach a candidate to tell former customers where they are going. The customer rule protects service to customers who come unsolicited; solicitation is a different matter.
• If a candidate is leaving in a layoff, record it. Under 613.195(5) that can change how long the covenant runs.

What is the risk to the hiring company?

Because Nevada courts must revise overbroad covenants, a salaried candidate with a covenant signed for real consideration may be held to a narrower version, usually limited by time, county or customers. Former employers also sometimes bring claims against the new employer, for example that it interfered with the contract or received confidential information; that depends on what the new employer knew and did, and is for its counsel. Tell the client before final interviews, have counsel see the agreement before the offer, and confirm the "no confidential information" point on the offer call.

For staffing agencies, the hourly rule cuts both ways. Agencies placing hourly contract workers in Nevada should not expect a non-compete in their own worker agreements to apply to those workers, and client-side no-hire terms raise the separate issues covered in no-poach agreements and antitrust law. Licensing and hiring basics are in the Nevada staffing agency license guide and hiring employees in Nevada.

The federal rule does not change this: the FTC voted on September 5, 2025 to accede to the vacatur of its 2024 rule, and a February 12, 2026 Federal Register notice removed it from the Code of Federal Regulations.

A Nevada checklist

• Restrictive-agreement question asked of every candidate, in the same words.
• Facts recorded: scope, length, consideration received, layoff status, governing law.
• No pay or pay-history questions; NRS 613.133 observed.
• Customer follow-on and solicitation kept distinct in notes and advice to the client.
• No contact with former employers aimed at blocking a hire; NRS 613.200 in mind.
• Client and counsel informed before the offer; statute re-checked after the 2027 session.