3 new or pending employment laws in Pennsylvania that could impact your business

If you’re running a business in Pennsylvania, one new state law and two pieces of pending legislation could impact you and your employees.

Here’s what you need to know about these changes, or potential changes, to employment law.

In May, the Pennsylvania House passed House Bill 1200 — the Cannabis Health and Safety Act — which, among other provisions, decriminalized personal possession and the production of cannabis, making it punishable by fine only. It also would have allowed eligible adults to grow a limited number of plants at home. The bill was rejected by a state Senate committee.

However, a corollary of the bill was officially filed last week in what could lead to potential legalization of the substance for recreational use. Given the relaxation of laws surrounding cannabis usage nationally (and the potential for more tax revenues), some experts believe that recreational marijuana is not far off in Pennsylvania.

Trevor Serine, a business attorney based in Media, is not optimistic that either decriminalization or legalization bills will pass in the House or Senate. Still, he is advising his clients to revisit their drug testing policies and encouraging them to move away from preemployment drug testing for marijuana unless there are specific safety reasons for the requirement.

“We’ve been telling our clients to take a more practical, liability-focused approach to cannabis,” he said. “You usually will restrict a certain class of people automatically if you say you drug-test on hiring.”

But, Serine said, “from a practical standpoint and given the environment, are you actually now running off one of your best employees for something that’s really not a significant concern anymore? This is something employers have to consider.”

Another state law (House Bill 1633) that went into effect in January impacts businesses operating in the healthcare industry that employ doctors, certified registered nurse anesthetists and nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and other practitioners. Those professionals can now leave their jobs and — after one year — would not be subject to any noncompete clauses in their contracts, effectively letting them work anywhere, including at a firm’s competitors.

Existing noncompete clauses in employment contracts become unenforceable on the statute’s effective date, effectively nullifying them for practitioner mobility.

“Noncompete covenants that do not exceed one year in length remain enforceable when the healthcare practitioner voluntarily terminates employment,” said Robin Bond, an employment attorney based in Chesterbrook. “However, noncompetes are unenforceable if an employer involuntarily dismisses a practitioner for any reason — even if the noncompete duration is for one year or less."

Bond also points out that noncompetes tied to the sale of a business “can still be enforced” if the practitioner is a party to the sale and benefits financially from it.

“As a former practicing healthcare attorney, I always believed that the public interest was not well served when hospitals were allowed to use noncompetes to limit a patient’s ability to follow the doctor of their choosing,” she said. “This new law renders unenforceable any noncompete that ‘has the effect of impeding’ certain healthcare practitioners’ ability to treat or accept new patients.”

House Bill 630 is currently working its way through the Pennsylvania General Assembly for the 2025-2026 legislative session and could impact how Pennsylvania companies hire workers.

This legislation would update the commonwealth’s current equal pay laws to ensure that employers are not taking into consideration a potential employee’s pay history when negotiating wages. It also prohibits “gag” orders on current employees from discussing their compensation and requires employers to publish pay ranges for positions when listing jobs.

There are already dozens of states that have previously passed or are considering laws requiring pay transparency and banning the discussion of salary history.

Serine sees merit in these provisions and warns of significant liabilities if employers run afoul of the potential law.

“There are some really harsh penalties in this legislation,” he said. ”I would not advise my clients to roll those dice if this law gets passed as written.”

Bond said this law would go a long way toward protecting equal pay rights for women.

“The concept of ‘pay equity’ means compensating employees the same when they perform the same or similar job duties, while at the same time accounting for other factors, such as experience level, job performance, and tenure with the employer,” she said. “There has been a longtime disparity in the pay between male and female workers, and asking for prior pay history in the application process, for example, can potentially create a pay barrier for female job seekers.”

There will always be the possibility of new legislation and rules at the state and federal levels that will impact the workplace. Some experts, like Serine, suggest not getting emotional but rather taking a bottom-line approach to managing the risk of inadvertently not being in compliance.

“The best way to prepare yourself for laws like these as a small-business owner is to protect yourself from legal liability and lower risk,” he said. “It’s not your place to enforce the morality of the day. Make sure you have good insurance policies.”