Ineffable, Recursive and Fractile back UK limits on non-competes

Ineffable Intelligence, Recursive Superintelligence and Fractile are among UK technology companies whose founders, executives and investors have backed a call for tighter limits on non-competes. The ineffable recursive fractile non-competes campaign also asks the government to address extended notice periods and enforced gardening leave, according to reporting by the Financial Times.

The joint letter was coordinated by Inherent Laboratories, a London AI startup, and had more than 20 signatories, the Financial Times reported. Other organisations represented among the signatories included ElevenLabs, Synthesia, Fuse Energy and chip developer Olix.

The letter was addressed to Prime Minister Andy Burnham and trade secretary Jonathan Reynolds, according to the Financial Times. Its signatories argue that restrictions on changing jobs can hold back entrepreneurship, competition and innovation. Those are the group’s arguments, rather than a government finding or announced policy.

What are UK startups asking for on non-competes?

The request is broader than a demand to abolish one contractual term. The founders want restrictions on non-compete clauses, lengthy notice periods and enforced gardening leave. A non-compete is a term in an employment contract that limits a former employee’s ability to join or start a competing business after leaving, according to the Department for Business and Trade.

For AI companies and other high-growth employers, the dispute centres on how quickly experienced staff can move between companies or form new ones. The founders’ letter says the existing restrictions can inhibit those moves. Employers, meanwhile, can use contractual restrictions to protect legitimate interests, a consideration acknowledged by the Competition and Markets Authority.

Where does UK non-compete reform stand?

The government’s policy process predates the letter. The Department for Business and Trade published a working paper on November 26, 2025 and closed it to responses at 11:59pm on February 18, 2026. It was designed to inform discussion over whether and how to proceed, rather than being a formal consultation or a statement of enacted reform.

The paper set out four possible routes: a statutory maximum duration for non-competes; a ban on such clauses in employment contracts; a ban for workers below a salary threshold; or a salary-threshold ban combined with a statutory time limit. The department’s working paper did not commit ministers to any option.

On February 25, the CMA backed a combined approach: prohibit non-competes below a salary threshold and set a statutory length limit above it. That is advice from the competition regulator, not a government decision.

The Financial Times reported that ministers had not formed a concrete view when it published its account of the letter. The letter itself does not change employment contracts or establish government policy.

This story draws on original reporting from Sifted.