H.B. 270 Healthcare Worker Post-Employment Amendments

What this bill does

This bill would eliminate non-compete clauses in healthcare worker contracts, so workers could work elsewhere after leaving. It would also let healthcare workers tell patients or former patients where they will work now or in the future, while still allowing contracts to recover costs like sign-on bonuses, education, and relocation expenses; it applies only going forward.

Plain-English summary written by AI from the official description. Check the official text below.

Your legislators on this bill

Enter your address to see what your own representative and senator did on this bill.

Quotes come from the official recordings' automatic captions, which can mishear words. Speakers and summaries are identified by AI and can be wrong. Use the ▶ links to check the recording.

Take action

This bill's session is over, but your legislators still want to hear from you. Ideas that died often come back next year.

Enter your address to get your legislators' contact information and a ready-to-send message about this bill.

Every vote

• 11 yes, 0 no, 3 absentHouse Health and Human Services Committee: vote to change the bill · Feb 4, 2026Who voted how
• 11 yes, 0 no, 3 absentHouse Health and Human Services Committee: vote to approve it · Feb 4, 2026Who voted how
• 11 yes, 0 no, 3 absentHouse Health and Human Services Committee: Consent Calendar Recommendation · Feb 4, 2026Who voted how
• 71 yes, 0 no, 4 absentFinal House vote · Feb 17, 2026Who voted how
• 5 yes, 0 no, 3 absentSenate Business and Labor Committee: Amendment Recommendation · Feb 27, 2026Who voted how
• 4 yes, 2 no, 2 absentSenate Business and Labor Committee: vote to approve it · Feb 27, 2026Who voted how
• 18 yes, 2 no, 9 absentFinal Senate vote · Mar 5, 2026Who voted how
• 66 yes, 1 no, 8 absentHouse vote to accept the other chamber's changes · Mar 5, 2026

Hearings and debates

• Jan 27, 2026 House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee
• Feb 4, 2026 House Health and Human Services Committee▶ Watch
  Transcript (60 turns)

  1. Rep. Logan Monson (Committee chair)1:19:50

     Um, we will move to our next agenda item, which is, um, house Bill two 70, Representative Hall.

  2. Rep. Katy Hall1:20:18

     All right. Thank you Mr. Chair. And thank you for committee for, for hearing this bill here. Um, amazingly, we, we were supposed to hear this in business and labor and their docket is so full and we've had some amazing, really good kind of consensus around this that is, was surprising honestly. Um, but it, it allowed us to kind of move it over here and still have the di the discussion over here a little sooner. So HB 70 or HB two 70, um, this issue regarding non-compete clauses in healthcare employment was brought to my attention by a family physician group, um, and Ms. Marianne Martindale here. Um, and, uh, so the, the issue was mostly from her group. And then additionally, representative CH had spoken with several mental health providers experiencing similar concerns, um, particularly regarding their ability to ensure continuity of care for their patients. So that's where this comes from. It updates Utah's employment law to better protect healthcare workers and strengthen our healthcare workforce while preserving fair business practices. At its core, this bill prohibits healthcare employers from enforcing post-employment non-compete agreements against the healthcare professionals, including nurses, physicians, physical therapists, PTs, social workers. We've outlined all of the, the things in the bill. We hope we've caught everyone. Um, under current law, some healthcare workers are contractually restricted from working in their field for up to a year and within a certain geographical distance after leaving an employer. So this ensures that going forward, those restrictions would stop for healthcare workers, recognizing the importance of licensed healthcare worker mobility and, uh, and patient access to care. Um, additionally, it protects healthcare workers' rights to communicate with patients prohibiting non-solicitation agreements that would prevent a former employer or former provider from simply informing patients about their new practice, location or employment situation, ensuring transparency, transparency and again, that continuity of care for patients. Um, it does not prohibit a reasonable severance arrangements, um, or non-compete language related to business sales under existing law. Nor does it disrupt other protections employers may need for proprietary information. Um, I just wanted to turn the time over a little bit to, um, Maryanne Martindale to kind of explain some of the things that we were seeing in the healthcare space, uh, which is why this bill came forward. So I'll turn the time to her for a second. Hi,

  3. Maryann Martindale, Utah Academy of Family Physicians1:22:50

     Maryanne Martindale, you, Utah Academy of Family Physicians. Um, first of all, I just wanna say I think I'm in the wrong business because it sounds like we need, we need to be ambulatory. 'cause that's, that's, that's a good gig. Um, so, uh, Representative Hall, uh, thank you so much for, for running this. Um, while we brought it to the, to her, um, I know I wanted this to be specifically about family physicians because this covers the gamut of healthcare providers. Um, contracts are, are all over the place. Some are five miles, some are three counties, some are 45 miles, some are a year, some are six months. And the inconsistency and the disruption that it causes not only in employment but also in patient con continuity is, is really frustrating. Um, I do want to acknowledge the collaboration that we went through in this process. We had employer groups that were very willing to, um, meet us on this. I've always said about, about good policy, it's when nobody gets everything they want, but everybody gets something they need. And I think that's, this is a real example of that Bill. Um, just for some of the little, few data points, um, utilize 49th out of 50th in primary care physicians per capita. Um, we, uh, the average physician, uh, spends about 11 years, usually a minimum of 11 years. It can be over that and ends up with about 200 to $500,000 in debt. Um, there's a million reasons for leaving and we didn't even wanna get into the reasons because it shouldn't matter. You know, I mean, these are, this is, we live in a free market right? To work state. And all we're saying is that if someone goes to the effort of learning, of gaining the education that they need to pursue their career in this selected field, that they should have the right to move to a place that maybe is just a better fit. It might be better fit financially, it might be a better fit for practice style. It might just be a better fit for their family. I mean, we just, it doesn't matter what the reason is. Um, but to representative Hall's point, we did, we, we are only touching the non-compete. We don't want to impede an employer from having additional contractual clauses such as, uh, remuneration for like, sign-on bonuses, additional training, fellowships, startup costs, things like that. Those are all very fair. And, and we don't wanna get in that. We just wanna allow people the freedom of movement. Um, I do wanna read just, uh, quickly a statement. I, uh, this was, uh, Dr. Spain was going to call in when we were on a different committee time, but he was unable to, he's on committee. Um, and he asked me to read this, my non-compete. And I'm not gonna name the employer 'cause I know that's not really what this is about. Um, my non-compete effectively encompassed the entire Salt Lake Valley. When I began looking for a new job, I knew this meant I'd be relocating out of the state. Utah County was not a right fit. I didn't wanna commute to Park City in the chance of snow or distance. And the distance to other areas was just not feasible. My life, my family, my community was all in the same area. Next month I'm moving to Vancouver, Washington, leaving behind over a thousand patients who are heartbroken that their caregivers leaving, leaving a city that already is desperate for primary care providers. And because it is deemed necessary that I not work for a competitor, this community loses yet another primary care physician. My new job in Vancouver has protected physicians. In fact, they laughed when I asked if they had a non-compete. So this is something that, um, in the notes that we, we passed around, there's already 10 states that have effectively banned this. There's another 11 that have bills right now in process. This is something that's changing. It's time to change. This particular part of contract law non-competes should be anathema to anyone that believes in the right to work or in a, in a free market state. Um, the bill is simple, doesn't preclude any of the other clauses that we've talked about. It just allows trained healthcare providers across the spectrum to leave employment if they choose and to still continue to work. And that's my presentation. Mm-hmm. Thank you. Thank you.

  4. Rep. Katy Hall1:26:45

     So again, this supports patient access and continuity of care. It strengthens workforce flexibility at a time when healthcare staffing challenges are real. And it aligns with modern employment standards and fairness. And, and again, I wanna note that this is not retroactive. We're not going back into, into contracts that are already existing. Um, and it's just moving forward on non-competes. That doesn't mean that, as Marianne explained, it doesn't mean that a, that an employer couldn't have in their contract. You know, we, we paid such and such an amount for moving you out here and starting your practice. And it doesn't touch any of those things that they can make in their contract with themselves. Um, only the post-employment part of it. So that is the bill. I'm happy to take any questions 'cause I probably forgot some things, so.

  5. Rep. Logan Monson (Committee chair)1:27:35

     Awesome. Um, we'll go to the committee now for any clarifying questions. We'll start with Representative Shelley.

  6. Rep. Tiara Shelley1:27:44

     Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to say the, the main concern that I heard with the mental health space is that it's so important that patients have the continuity of care that you mentioned and that it's, it's doubly hard for people who are in an emotional state, who are connected with a caregiver who is meeting their needs to have to lose that person and then start all over. So that was what brought me into the space and I was happy to see these guys expanded. So, thank you.

  7. Rep. Logan Monson (Committee chair)1:28:17

     Any other questions from the committee? I'm not seeing any,

  8. Unknown committee member1:28:24speaker not certain

     but I'll just add, um, so I, I, I work as a nurse, um, and, and never really thought I would deal with a non-compete in, in my life. And I did. I, I had to sign a non-compete, um, when I worked for a, a company, um, in home health. And, and it was because of just the nature of, of the, I guess, industry at the time. Um, but it really limited what I could have done afterwards if I needed to, um, just simply as a nurse, as a, as a visit nurse going out and, and making visits to patients. So I, I appreciate the work that you have done on this. I think that there, um, has been some good conversations and progress in as far as shaping what, what we have now.

  9. Rep. Logan Monson (Committee chair)1:29:08

     I'm not seeing anything else from the committee. Is there anyone from the public that would like to comment to this? We do have quite, I mean, not a lot. Like, it looks like five or six. So we'll, um, just remind you as you come up to sign the, um, paper there, just, um, so we know who you are and then as you're speaking, so the next person can come to the next chair and start filling out the paperwork there. Um, and then once you get that filled out, if you'll start with your name and who you represent, and we'll go from there. Do you wanna go? Go ahead.

  10. Kurt Bramble, resident1:29:48

      Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, if, uh, it, if it's okay with the chair, uh, first of all, my name is Kurt Bramble. I'm here testifying on behalf of myself. The firm that I'm associated with represents the PAs and my son Zach, is one of the registered lobbyists. He'd like to pass out a, a single page handout that explains some of the, the financial stuff of the non-compete, if that'd be okay. Yeah, you can bring it up here to, to me and then we can get up. Mr. Chair, members of the committee. I'm not here to talk about the finances. I recognize there are, are two physicians on the committee. I'm gonna tell you my own journey with non-competes in May of 2025, I was, uh, uh, I had some, what I, I jokingly referred to as minor surgery. I had a Quadro quadruple bypass open heart surgery, and because of non-competes, Revere Health refused. So I had the surgery on May 7th, soon after May 7th, the entire cardiology team left Revere Health. It is my understanding from what I've been told, that their attorneys told the physicians, all the entire cardiology team, that they were prohibited from having any contact with patients. None whatsoever. I called Revere multiple times because after open heart surgery, as the doctors on the committee are probably aware, there's several postoperative, uh, uh, checkups and whatever that you go through to determine that the surgery was successful, modifying medications and whatever. While I was in, in the hospital, they scheduled one follow-up appointment for a, uh, an ultrasound echocardiogram, whatever, whatever the, the medical term is. That occurred in August, but it wasn't until January of this year that I was able to get a cardiologist to actually give the results of what that test the previous August had been. So having had open heart surgery, quadruple bypass because of non-competes, there was absolutely no access to cardiology follow up. The cardiologist that had been my cardiologist for over 15 years, almost my entire time. I served here for 24 years, 15 years of that, I was going in every year for a cardiac, uh, physical. It showed no indications or problems, whatever I was, he was prohibited from, from talking to me. The, the instructions that I understand they were given. They could have no communication with patients whatsoever. And calling IHC to get follow-up care, just saying, uh, uh, a month or two post-surgery saying, Hey, uh, I've had this surgery. I, I should probably get in for a follow-up four different times. Sitting on the phone for over two hours and then having the phone disconnected, hung up from IH C's end. There was zero access to any type of post-surgical follow-up care for nine months. That's what the, the human side of these non-compete agreements means in terms of, of client care and, and patient, uh, outcomes. In my case, I was told by both Revere and IEC, well, if you have any problem, just go to an emergency room. I was fortunate. I had no complications, none whatsoever. I've been scuba diving, I've been mountain climbing, I've been flying hotter balloons. I've been in all kinds of things post surgery. But had I had any incident at all, as a matter of fact, after nine months when I finally got in to see a cardiologist, he said they should have modified the beta blockers and the other medications several months earlier. That's what the practical patient experience is with the non-competes. You can tell as A-C-P-A-I could talk about the finances and such, but there's a real human side of this that you need to consider. I would urge every one of you to vote for this bill. Thank you. Happy to respond to any questions.

  11. Rep. Logan Monson (Committee chair)1:33:44

      Thank you. I am not seeing any questions. Appreciate you.

  12. Sarah Stroup, Utah Association for Marriage and Family Therapy1:33:48

      Hello, my name is Sarah Strub, and I am the legislative chair for the Utah Association for Marriage and Family Therapy. I also happen to own one of the largest outpatient mental health practices in the state. Uh, we are in full support of this bill, and we wanna thank the bill sponsor for her attention to this critical matter. Non-compete clauses have no place in mental health care. These agreements treat clients as proprietary assets rather than individuals in need of stable care. Um, I get emails regularly from students, interns, and my colleagues asking what to do as they fear retaliation from their employer. Uh, we ask that the committee support this bill to end these predatory practices and prioritize ethical standards of our profession over restrictive business practices. Thank you.

  13. Rep. Logan Monson (Committee chair)1:34:35

      Thank you. We have a question for you? Yes, Representative Clancy. Thank

  14. Rep. Clancy1:34:38

      You, Mr. Chair. Do are, do you know if in your line of work for marriage and family therapists, do you know if interns, I don't know, and I don't know if that's the right word, are interns subject to non-compete agreements?

  15. Sarah Stroup, Utah Association for Marriage and Family Therapy1:34:50

      They're not supposed to be, but I have noted that in your bill. Um, I was recently reached out to by, um, a colleague who took on a student intern who was put under a non-compete. Those are typically not allowed by the universities. Um, but there had been a side deal made. Um, and so that was something I'm aware of and I'm tracking and, um, also referenced in your bill with non-competes.

  16. Rep. Logan Monson (Committee chair)1:35:17

      Thank you, sir. Awesome. Thank you. Go ahead.

  17. Michelle McOmber, Utah Medical Association1:35:22

      Thank you, Mr. Chair. Michelle McCumber with the Utah Medical Association, representing physicians in every specialty, thousands of physicians across the state and every specialty. Um, we wanna bring the, we want to thank, um, both Representative Hall and the family physicians for bringing this forward. Um, they brought it to our House of Delegates, um, and we passed a resolution to support, uh, getting rid of non-competes. It has been an issue in healthcare, and we don't wanna lose the physicians that we have in the country. Not our only, we have a shortage in family medicine, but in all specialties. Um, and we're at the bottom of the, um, kind of all of the states, somewhere in the neighborhood of, you know, 46 to 49th, depending on which statistic you look at in physicians per population. And we don't wanna lose them. I do have a personal story in my sister's. An orthopedic surgeon was here in Utah. My and her husband was a ophthalmologist. He had a non-compete. Uh, she had an established practice, and he, uh, had his practice not quite as well established, but they ended up having to move to California because of his non-compete. So even we lost not only the ophthalmologist, but the orthopedic surgeon. Um, and I do think it's very important to get rid of these non-competes. It's, it allows people to practice where they have been established, um, where they live and, uh, where their kids go to school, et cetera. And so we, uh, we do think this is the step in the right direction. Thank you.

  18. Jessica Black, Utah Mental Health Counselors Association1:36:50

      Thank you. All right. Hello, members of the committee. My name is Jessica Black, and I'm the legislative chair for the Utah Mental Health Counselors Association, and we are in strong support of HB two 70. Um, at its heart, this is a patient's rights bill. Um, healthcare is deeply personal, and when a healthcare provider is bound by a non-compete, it is actually the patient that suffers the most. Currently, if a therapist leaves a clinic, their patients are often not told where their provider has gone. Um, this bill ensures that a patient's continuity of care is never interrupted by a corporate contract. Uh, we would like to be able to protect the bond between a patient and their provider, uh, by allowing healthcare workers to practice where they are needed the most. Without the threat of costly legal entanglements, we empower patients to follow the care that they trust. Furthermore, we have to address how these agreements exploit those entering the profession. Interns and associates are frequently pressured into signing non-competes before they fully understand the long-term implications for their careers. These new therapists are then threatened with legal action, which they cannot afford simply for telling their clients where they're going. Um, young professionals shouldn't be locked down before they've even begun. Forcing a new therapist to choose between their community and their livelihood is a predatory practice that hurts our workforce and lacks the transparency that is essential for an ethical healthcare system. We encourage and urge you to support this bill.

  19. Rep. Logan Monson (Committee chair)1:38:37

      Thank you, Jessica. I do have a question from the committee for you. Representative Eliason.

  20. Rep. Steve Eliason1:38:42

      Uh, thank you. You touched on something that, um, I don't think this bill touches on, but I just wanted to make a a point that maybe we at least put on the radar. I had a family member that was, had a, a, a fabulous mental health therapist, and, uh, one day a letter arrived from the, the corporate entity that said, uh, this therapist is no longer with our system. Um, you can contact our Ogden or Provo offices to see if they have somebody that can help you otherwise contact the UMA. Um, when my son called and said, where do they go? Because I've had a strong relationship with this therapist, they're like, we don't have to disclose that to you. I mean, they, they, they knew, they wouldn't say, had to go through other means to try to locate this person to, you know, so there wasn't a gap in care. Um, I don't think there's any state law that requires that type of disclosure, but I think it's something that we should consider, uh, as we go forward to maintain continuity of care with patients. So, it's just a comment.

  21. Rep. Logan Monson (Committee chair)1:39:40

      You're welcome to comment that if you'd like. I

  22. Jessica Black, Utah Mental Health Counselors Association1:39:43

      Agree with you.

  23. Rep. Logan Monson (Committee chair)1:39:44

      Okay. Thank you. Awesome. Thank You, Jessica. Go ahead.

  24. Lauren Scholnick, Utah Association for Justice1:39:49

      Hello, committee. My name is Lauren Skolnik. I'm, I'm here on behalf of the Utah Association for Justice. I am an employment lawyer, um, in Salt Lake City, but I practice throughout the state. I, I've seen more than my fair share of doctor and medical provider non-competes, um, that what I have to tell people is that, yes, you can hire me, and yes, I can try and fight your non-compete, but that could be a really long fight. And probably not. Surprisingly, many people say, yikes. Um, not only is that gonna be expensive, but that's gonna take me away from what I really wanna do, which is to help patients. Um, you may be interested to know, and maybe some of you already know, that lawyers cannot be subject to non-compete agreements. Doctors can, um, in the lawyer world, the reason why we can't be subjected to non-compete is because our, um, the people who we work for, our clients need to have choice. They need to be able to choose which lawyer represents them, and they need to be able to continue that representation. If the lawyer happens to leave a law firm, set up their own law firm, go to another law firm, um, and the person, the client has to be told where the lawyer went so that they can track them down. That is not true for doctors or other medical providers. Um, we think what's good for the goose is also good for the gander, and that's why the, um, Utah Association for Justice, who represents a lot of injured people, people injured in medical malpractice, people injured in auto accidents, should be able to continue with their medical care in all sorts of ways after those kinds of horrific, um, experiences. Um, the non-compete is super scary. It's super scary. It's a super scary legal tool. It's a sledgehammer, not a scalpel. Some of the scalpels that exist for employers are things like non-solicitation agreements, training repayment, moving expenses, repayment, uh, confidentiality, non-disclosure agreements. None of that is impacted by saying that a doctor can't be subjected to a non-compete. So we strongly encourage, uh, you all to vote in favor of this bill. Thank you.

  25. Rep. Logan Monson (Committee chair)1:42:28

      Thank you, Lauren. Alright, go ahead.

  26. Justine Case, Rare Disease Advisory Council1:42:35

      Hi, my name is Justine Case. I am a member of the Rare Disease Advisory Council. I am a patient myself, and I'm also a community organizer for disease specific support groups. Um, as many as one in 10 Utahans actually has a rare disease when you put 'em all together. So we are not really that rare. When you put us all together, HB two 70, um, addresses a very real barrier, very real barrier for us, and that's that when a physician or other specialist leaves a large institution in Utah, my experience and observation is they usually leave Utah. And, um, I have personally lost at least six different providers in the last five years. A physical therapist, occupational therapist, geneticist, a neuro gastroenterologist, which is a very unique subspecialty, uh, an orthotist and an immunologist that was specialized in my rare immune disorder. The care I got from each of these providers is why I am no longer disabled. My community of hundreds of families no longer has access to these providers because they left Utah because of non-compete clauses. One of them left the United States, had to go to Amsterdam to find somewhere else with so many patients with what I've got and where there is interest. So I just, I would implore you to please support HB two 70 because, um, we need your help to keep our doctors. Thank you.

  27. Rep. Logan Monson (Committee chair)1:44:04

      Thank you. Okay.

  28. Ava Szajnuk, Rare and Undiagnosed Network1:44:09

      Hi, representatives. Um, my name is Ava Zack. I'm a senior at Skyline High School, and I serve as an advisory board member for the Rare and undiagnosed network, which is a nonprofit that serves rare and undiagnosed communities. Um, I am also an undiagnosed and rare disease patient. That's probably the most important thing you need to know about me. Um, over 350,000 utahns live with rare diseases, navigating complex health challenges that require trusted consistent care by limiting restrictive non-compete clauses. This bill would support provider retention in Utah, while also keeping physicians accessible to the patients who depend on them, which is more often than not mostly the rare disease community. I personally am at a crucial time in transitioning from childhood care to adult care myself for my complex medical conditions. I was blessed to find two extremely important specialists to treat my dis anomia pots and gastrointestinal issues, my neuro gastroenterologist and my gastroenterologist. After both doctors left the University of Utah, they left Utah. Altogether. I lost two crucial physicians who aren't just providers but anchors for my medical stability on a daily basis. My conditions changed by the hour, and I now face this unpredictability without my medical anchors. We still don't know the root cause of my illness. And that uncertainty is one shared by many Utahans. It's essential to that we make the continuity of care possible for Utahans, whether they're rare, undiagnosed, or part of the broader public, so that they don't lose the chance to, to live fully simply because their support system is forced to leave. As representative Bramble stated earlier, this is the human side of this issue. Um, thank you for allowing me to share it, and please support HB two 70 to close this Utah provider gap and really, truly help the patients that you represent. Thank you.

  29. Rep. Logan Monson (Committee chair)1:45:53

      Thank you, Ava. We do have some online comments. Um, it looks like we have about five. We'll start with, um, Lindsey Drew, and then we'll go to Frank Powers and then Brandon Hall. Just a reminder online, if you will, um, turn on your camera and start with telling us who you are and who you represent, where you're located as well. Sorry. So we will start with Lindsay Drew. Let's move. We don't, not seeing Lindsay on here. So Brandon Hall, we have on

  30. Dr. Brandon Hall, Rocky Vista University and Utah Academy of Family Physicians1:46:35

      Good afternoon. My, uh, I'm Dr. Brandon Hall. Um, I am a family physician and, and I am the vice chair of primary care at Rocky Vista University in St. George. I'm also on the board of the Utah Academy of Family Physicians. Um, I wanted to hit this from two sides. One personal and one, um, kind of professional. This is something I've actually been studying and given lectures on, um, for quite a while. And there is a benefit, um, short term to hospitals and employers to, um, non-compete clauses. And, and that is that the investment that they make in new physicians that they bring in or new providers, um, they aren't at risk of having that provider, you know, guaranteeing a salary. And then, uh, at the end of that guarantee, having that provider move off with a full panel of patients to work for someone else. Um, so there's a reason these, these came into existence. Having said that there is pretty strong data that this is harmful to patients and that it's harmful, uh, to providers as well. Um, the alternative for employers is to actually increase the attractiveness of the position. So, increase culture, increase reimbursement. Um, and so that's a difficult thing to do. Um, I was, uh, I, I've been a doctor in Utah. I had been working for 13 years when I was recruited to a new position in a area that had been a healthcare desert in Lehi, Utah. Um, and there was no presence of primary care. And at the new hospital that, uh, that asked me to come work there as, uh, I, so I started a practice from scratch, uh, in a new area of Utah. And because of a dispute between my employer and the hospital system, um, both elected not to honor my contract as far as reimbursement. Um, and what ended up happening was that I, I, for about two years, took a job on weekends working as a hospitalist to supplement my outpatient practice. Um, at the end of two years, it came obvious that that wasn't really a great way to live life. And so because of my non-compete clause, no, I, I specialize in tricky cases. I, I specialize in, in patients that are, uh, that other doctors aren't comfortable with. Um, because of my non-compete clause, um, I ended up having to move my family to Alaska, and we left Utah. Um, after 13 years of care, there's solid data that visits decreased by 20%. Um, when this happens, that it's, it actually if adversely affects outcomes and hurts patients, there's even some data that it may kill patients. Um, so while this is beneficial, I would like to encourage you to beneficial to hospitals and employers. They like it. I would like to encourage you to consider that this is unethical.

  31. Rep. Logan Monson (Committee chair)1:49:53

      Thank you, Dr. Hall. Appreciate you. All right. We'll now move to Lindsey. Drew. Again, just a reminder, tell us your name, who you represent, and where you are, where you reside. All right. Maybe we'll move. Oh, are you? See, you're unmuted, Lindsay. I'm sorry. You're good. There we go. You can hear me now? Yep, we can hear you. We can see you. Okay.

  32. Lynsey Drew, Utah Academy of Family Physicians1:50:30

      Thank you. Uh, committee members. Um, my name is Lindsay Drew. I'm a family medicine physician. Um, I'm representing, uh, the UAFP as chair of the board of directors. I reside in Orem, Utah. I'm also the dean of the Nordic College of Osteopathic Medicine here in Provo, Utah. So I just wanted to give a slightly different perspective as it relates to medical students. And, um, we know that medical students are making a really big decision, um, when they choose, uh, where to train and where to practice. And they're just not asking, you know, where they can match in, into residency. But they're also asking where they can build a, a life, raise a family, um, and practice medicine sustainably over decades. Um, and the non-compete clauses can weigh heavily on, on some of those decisions of where to train. And so, uh, students definitely are very savvy and they understand these things. Um, and so they see non-compete clauses as a risk, uh, without any reward. And so they know that if a job isn't the right fit, um, for any professional reason or a family need or even burnout, um, that they might have to be forced to leave their communities and, and leave the state entirely. So that lack of flexibility is a deterrent, um, and not an incentive for them to come and train in Utah as well. And as was already mentioned, Utah does struggle to recruit and retain primary care physicians. And so we want to really, um, make sure that there is opportunity that, um, that they can not feel trapped at the very start of their career. And, um, that's how we're losing people to other states. And so, house Bill two 70 can send a very clear message to those future physicians that we value them, we value their professional judgment. Um, we, we value their ability to, to choose where they practice. And this bill protects, um, patient continuity, preserves the, you know, reasonable employer cost recovery, um, and also aligns with a free market in a right to work state. So, um, if we want medical students to choose Utah to train here and to stay here long term, then it would be ideal to remove those barriers that push them away. And that's exactly what House Bill two 70 does. So I urge you to support this. Thank you.

  33. Rep. Logan Monson (Committee chair)1:52:48

      Awesome. Thank you, Lindsay. All right, we've got a few more, um, Frank Powers, then Melissa Hinton and Tiana McCall. Frank, go ahead.

  34. Frank Powers, Community Health Centers1:53:00

      Uh, thank you. Uh, my name is Frank Powers. I'm a family physician in Salt Lake City, Utah. I am the residency director and director of education at the Community health Centers, the largest health center in Utah. I am here to speak in support of this bill, um, and I even, even more in support of it. After hearing all of this testimony, my perspective is from the next level of training. After medical school, all physicians must do residency. Um, in order to address workforce in the state, we created more residencies. I started this residency to help with the workforce, and we have excellent training pro programs in Utah. Many reasons to stay in Utah. But as Dr. Uh, drew said, our residents are savvy. They are hearing these stories of non-competes, um, that we heard testimony on reading it online. And when they look at a state that may have a non non-compete clause, um, allowed, and then look at a state like Washington, they're choosing to go to Washington. And so we need to have all of the reasons we can to attract people here To speak of the interest. In my new program, we had 366 applications for just four positions this year. Um, we are getting top-notch people, and so I'm here to speak in support of this bill to keep in alignment, um, from a, a different perspective as a leader at our health center, while we feel the strain of losing providers and, um, when they have reasons to move away, we have never had a non-compete clause because, um, as has been said previously, evidence shows it doesn't actually work long-term. It creates difficulties for patients, and it really just creates, um, bad feelings with the employee and makes your job less attractive. So I am fully in support of this, uh, bill.

  35. Rep. Logan Monson (Committee chair)1:54:54

      Awesome. Thank you, Frank. We'll move to Melissa.

  36. Melissa Hinton, Utah Nurse Practitioners Association1:55:04

      Good afternoon, committee members. My name is Melissa Hinton. I'm a doctorate nurse practitioner in southern Utah. I also am representing the Utah Nurse Practitioners Association. Um, I've had personal experience with non-compete in this area, which is a little bit more unique than living on the Wasatch front. Um, the closest town to St. George, um, is Hurricane, which is about 20 minutes away, and then Cedar City an hour away, uh, in a non-compete that I personally had. I was not allowed to work in any town that this entity, um, was established in, which included pretty much all of Southern Utah. So I would've had to move into Nevada to, uh, get a job or move outta my discipline completely, which I did have to do. So I, I want to say that, uh, this bill for non-compete is well timed. We know the FTC is encouraging this. We know that hospital associations, um, have been encouraged by the FTC to get rid of non-competes. And I have to say that there is no time that is more timely than right now to do this. We've been waiting for a while. We've seen the negative outcomes for patients, but in my case, I was also not allowed to contact my patients, which was not written in my contract, but they had no idea where I went either. And it, it did, it really broke my heart to have my patients being stranded, not knowing where I was wanting to transfer care, um, or maybe even to follow me, which is their option and their right. Um, but I, I do think that it would be wise for, uh, the legislature to truly consider this this year and try to pass this. And I appreciate your time. Thank you.

  37. Rep. Logan Monson (Committee chair)1:57:10

      Thank you, Melissa. Our last, um, public comment will be Tiana McCall.

  38. Tiana McCall, National Association of Social Workers, Utah Chapter1:57:20

      Hello, my name is Tiana McCall, and I'm here on behalf of the National Association of Social Workers, the Utah Chapter. NASW Utah supports this bill as, as do many in the room, um, because it improves patient access to behavioral healthcare specifically, and it aligns employment practices with the ethical obligations of healthcare professionals. Um, Utah's behavioral health challenges specifically are not a lack of licensed clinicians, and it's more so that many individuals and families cannot adequately ask. Providers due to structural barriers and non-compete agreements in healthcare are directly contributing to this problem by preventing clinicians from continuing to practice in their communities after leaving an employer. Uh, when this occurs, as our has already been mentioned, clients lose continuity of care and are often pushed onto long wait lists or out of treatment entirely. And in behavioral health, specifically where trust and consistency are critical, these disruptions have very real consequences. Uh, and we appreciate that this bill preserves reasonable protections for employers while also removing barriers that unnecessarily limit patient access. So for those reasons, NASW supports this bill, um, and we urge you to move it forward. Thank you.

  39. Rep. Logan Monson (Committee chair)1:58:32

      Awesome. Thank you, Tiana. All right, so the, uh, we'll end our public comment portion. Um, we'll return to the committee for discussion on the bill. Um, Representative Eliason?

  40. Rep. Steve Eliason1:58:48

      Uh, yes. Uh, thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to make a motion to pass out. We don't have a substitute. We, we do A substitute. Uh, I'd like to make a motion that we adopt sub two to HB two 70.

  41. Rep. Logan Monson (Committee chair)1:59:02

      That motion is in order. Um,

  42. Rep. Steve Eliason1:59:05

      No, I don't wanna speak to it. Okay.

  43. Rep. Logan Monson (Committee chair)1:59:07

      To the, to the sponsor.

  44. Rep. Katy Hall1:59:09

      Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yeah. Sub two. Um, we had a, a good sub yesterday and some, we had some things that needed to be fixed last minute just now. And I'm pretty sure we got 'em all fixed. I've got the thumbs up from Austin, so, um, yes, let's move sub two. Thank you.

  45. Rep. Logan Monson (Committee chair)1:59:30

      Okay. Thank you to the committee for discussion on the motion. I'm not seeing Anissa. We'll place that motion. The motion is to, uh, move sub two on HB two 70. Um, all in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Say no. All right. That motion carries. Um, Representative Eliason, uh,

  46. Rep. Steve Eliason1:59:53

      Thank you. I'd like to make a motion that we pass out, uh, sub two HB two 70 with a favorable recommendation. And if I may, I'd like

  47. Rep. Logan Monson (Committee chair)2:00:00

      to brief briefly sp uh, speak to that. Yeah, Go ahead. Um,

  48. Rep. Steve Eliason2:00:04

      so one of the worst days in my professional career, I was, uh, told by a previous employer that I needed to tell the executive team that they had to sign a non-compete agreement. And when the question was posed, what if I don't, my basic response was, well, we've sure enjoyed working with you, but this will be your last day and or notice whatever. And I had to sign one myself. And, uh, it puts employees in an extremely unfair position. Luckily, that wasn't healthcare. So my lives and patient relationships didn't hang in the balance. I don't think I could do that in a healthcare setting if asked to do so. So commend the sponsor on this and, uh, it's a, a very consequential bill. So I'd like to make a motion we pass out the favor. Recommendation.

  49. Rep. Logan Monson (Committee chair)2:00:55

      Perfect. That motion is in order to the bill sponsor.

  50. Rep. Katy Hall2:01:01

      That is awesome. I would love it if you guys would all vote for this. I think, um, as a few people already mentioned, um, this protects all, all of our healthcare employees. It protects that continuity of care, it protects, um, he all of the healthcare spaces and keeping our physicians, our nurse practitioners, our mental health providers in the state of Utah where we want them. Um, I think I'm hopeful that other non-competes as well, passed through this, um, body as well. I think that now is the time. Somebody mentioned timing earlier, and I don't know why it's taken so long, but I think it's, I think the time is right to do this. So thank you. I appreciate it.

  51. Rep. Logan Monson (Committee chair)2:01:44

      Awesome. Thank you to the committee for further discussion on the motion. I am not seeing any, um, we'll place the motion. We will now vote on the motion, which is to favorably recommend house bill two 70, sub two, um, with a favorable recommendation. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Say no. That is unanimous. Thank you. JDPI, please. Thank you. Awesome. Thank you. We got that. Okay.

  52. Rep. Steve Eliason2:02:15

      Motion to adjourn. Ms. Left my light on.

  53. Rep. Logan Monson (Committee chair)2:02:24

      Oh, oh oh. Do you wanna withdraw your motion?

  54. Rep. Steve Eliason2:02:26

      I'm gonna withdraw my motion to adjourn. Yes. Okay.

  55. Rep. Logan Monson (Committee chair)2:02:29

      That motion is withdrawn. Representative fit? Yeah. Mr.

  56. Rep. Jake Fitisemanu2:02:32

      Vice chair. Given the unanimous recommendation of the committee and the over overwhelming support for the bill, I would move that we place house bill two 70 on the consent calendar.

  57. Rep. Logan Monson (Committee chair)2:02:41

      Okay. Yes, that's loud. Okay. That is loud. Um, so the motion is to place house bill two 70 on the consent calendar, um, to the bill sponsor.

  58. Rep. Katy Hall2:02:54

      Um, I think that would be amazing. I'm not sure how it's, in the past, it's been kind of a controversial thing, but this seems really like there's a, a wave to it, so I don't know. I'm, I'm for it. Yeah. Okay.

  59. Rep. Logan Monson (Committee chair)2:03:09

      To the committee. All right. Looks like no further dis to the, I guess to the maker of the motion to, um, waive. Good. Okay. So the, the motion is that we, um, that the house bill two 70 be placed on the con sub two be placed on the consent calendar. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Say no. Aye, that is unanimous as well. Congratulations. Thank you.

  60. Rep. Logan Monson (Committee chair)2:03:35

      I would take one more motion. Motion to adjourn. Alright then. Motion to adjourn. All in favor, we are adjourned. Thank you. Um.

• Feb 17, 2026 House floor debate▶ Watch
  Transcript (9 turns)

  1. Clerk (reading bill)1:36:35

     Second substitute House Bill two 70, healthcare worker, post-employment amendments by Representative Hall. This bill was heard in Health and Human Services with the vote of 11 0 3 Representative Hall. Thank

  2. Rep. Katy Hall1:36:47

     you, Mr. Speaker. Um, so this bill, HB two 70, does two things. It eliminates non-compete clauses in healthcare worker contracts. And number two, it allows for healthcare employee to inform a patient or former patient of the healthcare workers current or future place of employment. Um, I wanna make it clear, this Bill does not eliminate the ability for an employer to put some other things in a contract to recoup costs for things such as sign on bonuses, education, relocation costs, those kind of things. We're not even dealing with that part of contracts. This is just post-employment also, it is not retroactive. Um, so this bill was brought to me by a group of family practice physicians who said they're, we are losing healthcare workers as a state to other states, other areas that don't have these non-compete clauses for healthcare workers. Um, as well as another representative from Utah County who had a, a similar bill dealing with mental health providers, um, not being able to continue the continuity of care with their patients because of these, um, non-compete clauses in their contracts. Um, so non-compete clauses, they're antithetical to a free market system in a right to work state. Um, and Utah is 49th out of 50 for primary care workers, primary care physicians, sorry. Um, I've heard, I heard from a residency director in Utah who said that we are recruiting like really good talent from outside of the state and inside the state, um, to, to train for residency. And then when it's time for them to work, a lot of them are leaving because Utah still has these non-compete clauses in their contracts. Um, 10 states have already banned this, um, or, or have severe, has have limited that in non in healthcare spaces. And 11 more states are proposing something this year. This bill supports patient access and continuity of care with your provider if you so choose. It strengthens workforce flexibility and aligns with modern workforce standards. We have worked with the hospital association, hospital corporations, clinics, um, any mental health providers, everyone that's, that's reached out to us and everyone is neutral on the bill that we've talked to. Non-compete agreements in the healthcare space. Um, as one person put it, treat parent, treat patients as prietary information, prietary clients, patients are all of us. And we should be able to have access to anyone that gives us, um, healthcare, healthcare treatment in, in this space that that should be up to the patients. And this bill helps, helps that access go, uh, across the board. It would apply equally to clinics, hospitals, everyone in, in this healthcare space. So, um, that's basically the bill and I'm happy to take any questions.

  3. Speaker (presiding)1:39:50

     Thank you, Representative Hall discussion to the bill Representative Ward.

  4. Rep. Ward1:39:54

     Oh, thank you Mr. Speaker. I just wanna rise in support of the bill. To me, it just seems so clear I should not have to give up my ability to change jobs in order to be hired into a job. Um, we, we have a couple of quite large employers in healthcare, um, here in Utah and along the Wasatch front. Um, and the non-competes that have been in place force you to leave your community in order to move to another job. So your, your family will need to give up their school associations, your neighborhood associations. You'll need to go far enough away that all the connections that you have built will be lost. Um, and that, that, that just doesn't make sense to me. It, it's not good for patients, it's not good for people taking the jobs. Um, as someone who has a young adult son who I am hoping move back, moves back to the state to take his first job, it's a little nerve wracking to say, okay, well if, if you know the place that you really want to end up, you have to take your first job at least 15 miles away from that place so that later you'd be able to move where you really wanted. Those kinds of considerations shouldn't go into it. The sponsor's done just a great job working on this bill. The other thing that has just been so remarkable to me is that I have not heard from any of the groups who oppose it, who in times passed had said this was necessary. It is a great part of the bill to have this not be backward looking, no previous contracts were impinged. It's just going forward. And the considerations that an employer might have to say, well, these are costs that I might need to recoup in some way. If someone changes jobs, all of those things can still be contracted for which they should be contracted for. It's just that you can't prohibit that person from working in a different job close by. This is a great bill.

  5. Speaker (presiding)1:41:32

     Thank you, Representative Ward. Further discussion to the bill Representative Chev.

  6. Rep. Kristen Chevrier1:41:37

     Thank you Mr. Speaker. I also rise in support of the bill. I had a bill file open for the mental health non-compete space and was happy to combine it with the sponsor and create a better, um, a better bill that covers more people who need the support of having access to providers that they have had access to for a long time. So I I I would love it if everyone would vote yes.

  7. Speaker (presiding)1:42:06

     Thank you, Representative Shelley. Back to you, Representative Hall for summation.

  8. Rep. Katy Hall1:42:10

     Thank you Mr. Speaker. I wanna thank everyone for the groundswell of support on this and, and as we've heard, yeah, we haven't had much, we haven't had any really pushback on, on what we're trying to accomplish here. And I actually wanna thank you Mr. Speaker for, for starting that a few years ago and, and starting the ball rolling. So with that, I would really appreciate a, a vote of support on this bill. Thank you.

  9. Speaker (presiding)1:42:36

     Great summation. Representative Hall voting will now be open on second substitute HB two 70, seeing all present having voted voting is now closed. Eight second sub seat HB two 70 passed this by a 71. Yes vote zero, no votes be sent to the Senate for its consideration.

• Feb 27, 2026 Senate Business and Labor Committee▶ Watch
• Mar 5, 2026 Senate floor debate▶ Watch
  Transcript (16 turns)

  1. Senate presiding officer2:45:43

     Senator Brammer. Senator

  2. Sen. Brady Brammer2:45:44

     Brammer. Thank you. Uh, this bill does a couple things. Number one, it eliminates, uh, non-compete clauses in healthcare contracts and it voids a prohibition on providing information to a former patient about the healthcare provider's current employment or future employment. Uh, there's a different relationship between healthcare providers and patients than mere commerce. Uh, you know, I, there was, uh, when we've had our our children, we had a, an OB GYN that was, you know, uh, because my wife tends to have twins. Uh, it was a pretty, uh, you know, it's a high risk pregnancy and, and you end up seeing the doctor a lot and there were a lot of complications and, and, uh, you know, breaking that, uh, doctor patient, uh, relationship merely because the doctor needed to move offices or, or change their practice location, uh, simply doesn't make any sense. And so what this bill does not do is it does not eliminate the ability for an employer to recoup reasonable costs such as sign-on bonuses and relocation costs. It does not eliminate the ability for an employer to recoup costs associated with training such as fellowships and specialty training. And it does not apply to non-compete and non-disclosure agreements entered into, uh, before the effective date, which would be May 6th, 2026. And so with that, I'm open to any questions.

  3. Senate presiding officer2:47:03

     Thank you for that presentation. Do we have discussion to the bill Senator Plumb?

  4. Sen. Jen Plumb2:47:11

     Mr. President Pro? Thank you Mr. President Pro tem. I rise in support of this bill and also in the work that went into it and the conversations that were making it very clear what the key, uh, pieces were. And I think as the good senator referenced the fact that people's therapists were having to essentially abandon them and not let them know where they went because of misinterpretations. This is really going to do good for folks and I appreciate it coming forward.

  5. Senate presiding officer2:47:41

     Thank you. Further discussion to the bill. Seeing none. Senator Brammer back to you for summation or a motion?

  6. Sen. Brady Brammer2:47:48

     Um, I'm going to, I think we've got enough. I think we're okay here. So I'll, I'll, uh, call the question on it.

  7. Senate presiding officer2:47:57

     Okay. And the question is, under suspension of the rule shall second substitute house bill two 70 pass. Roll call vote.

  8. Senate clerk2:48:03

     Senator Vickers. Baldy Aye. Fluen Aye. Bramer Aye. Bus? Aye. Fillmore Escamilla. Aye. Fillmore Grover Harper. Aye. Kins Ipson Johnson. Aye. Juab McKay Mikel Milner Musselman Owens pitcher Plum Rebi Sandal Stevenson Stratton Bickers Weiler Wilson Winterton, president Adams

  9. Senate presiding officer2:48:59

     Second subject, house Bill two 70 Having received 19 na votes, one nay vote nine being absent passes the Senate be returned to the House for further consideration. Communications.

  10. Edward Mueller, Chief Clerk2:49:12

      Mr. President The house refused to concur with the Senate amendments to first substitute House Bill four 10 water leasing amendments by Representative Koford and requests the Senate recede from its amendments. Respectfully signed, Edward Mueller, chief Clerk,

  11. Senate presiding officer2:49:27

      Senator Sandall.

  12. Unknown speaker2:49:30speaker not certain

      Where did he go? He was right here. Uh, it's kind of his bill. Hmm. Uh, we wouldn't have read that had he not been right there. We were waiting for Senator Sandall to make a motion to either to recede or to refuse to concurrent appointed Conference Committee. Okay. Okay.

  13. Senate presiding officer2:50:41

      Not finding him. There he is. Senator Sandall.

  14. Sen. Scott D. Sandall2:50:47

      Yep. We're dealing with house before 10. The house refused to, uh, recede.

  15. Senate presiding officer2:50:54

      And you want to, uh, refuse to concur or to,

  16. Sen. Scott D. Sandall2:50:58

      Uh, my motion Be refuse to Concur with the, with the house.

• Mar 5, 2026 House floor debate▶ Watch
  Transcript (8 turns)

  1. Speaker (presiding)4:05

     Second substitute house Bill two 70, healthcare worker. Post-Employment Amendments by Representative Hall. Representative Hall.

  2. Rep. Katy Hall4:16

     Thank you Mr. Speaker. Motion to concur with the Senate amendments.

  3. Speaker (presiding)4:19

     Thank you representative. That motion is in order. Would like speak to it?

  4. Rep. Katy Hall4:22

     Yes. It was just, um, a little piece of language that we put in to make sure that if someone was working for a facility or something, but not working under the scope of their license, that, that it wouldn't apply to, to them. And that was all.

  5. Speaker (presiding)4:40

     Thank you Representative Hall Discussion to the motion to concur with the Senate amendments on second substitute HP two 70. See none. We'll go ahead and place the motion.

  6. Speaker (presiding)4:51

     All in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Will that motion passes?

  7. Speaker (presiding)4:57

     The bill's now open for final passes. Open for voting on final passage. Seeing all president have voted, voting now closed second substitute HP two 70 passed this body with 66 yes votes one no vote will be sent to the Senate for it.

  8. Speaker (presiding)6:43speaker not certain

     Uh, signature of the president, man reading clerk