What happens to provisions in the Boulder Designs Franchise Agreement that conflict with noncompetition covenant limitations in Washington?
Boulder_Designs Franchise · 2025 FDDAnswer from 2025 FDD Document
As a result, any provisions contained in the Franchise Agreement or elsewhere that conflict with these limitations are void and unenforceable in Washington.
RCW 49.62.060 prohibits Franchisor from restricting, restraining, or prohibiting Franchisee from (i) soliciting or hiring any employee of a franchisee of Franchisor or (ii) soliciting or hiring any employee of Franchisor.
As a result, any such provisions contained in the Franchise Agreement or elsewhere are void and unenforceable in Washington.
Source: Item 22 — CONTRACTS (FDD page 50)
What This Means (2025 FDD)
According to Boulder Designs' 2025 Franchise Disclosure Document, any provisions within the Franchise Agreement that clash with noncompetition covenant limitations in Washington state are considered void and unenforceable. This stems from Washington's Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 49.62.030, which stipulates that noncompetition covenants are unenforceable against independent contractors unless their annualized earnings from the enforcing party exceed $250,000, a figure adjusted annually for inflation.
This means that if a Boulder Designs franchisee in Washington hires an independent contractor, any non-compete agreement with that contractor is only valid if the contractor's earnings surpass the specified threshold. The franchisor cannot enforce a non-compete against a low-earning contractor, regardless of what the standard franchise agreement might say.
Furthermore, RCW 49.62.060 prevents Boulder Designs from restricting a franchisee's ability to solicit or hire employees from either other Boulder Designs franchisees or from the franchisor itself. Any clause in the Franchise Agreement attempting to impose such restrictions would also be void and unenforceable in Washington. This ensures franchisees in Washington have greater freedom in hiring, without fear of legal repercussions from the franchisor based on conflicting agreement terms.