Çoğu zaman işveren, işin sırrının suiistimal edilmesini önlemek amacıyla, aralarındaki sözleşmenin sona ermesinden sonra işçinin veya çalışanın başkaları veya kendisi için yaptığı işlerin benzerini yapmayacağını şart koşar. işçi bunları öğrendikten sonra onunla rekabet halindedir.Sözleşmenin sona ermesinden sonra işçinin işverenle rekabet etmemesi koşulu, iki menfaat arasında açık bir çelişki içermektedir: İşverenin menfaati ve işçinin menfaati. Dolayısıyla araştırma, bu iki menfaati olabildiğince uzlaştırmaya çalışmıştır. Bu, işverenin, sözleşmenin sona ermesinden sonra işçiyle rekabet eden işçiden işini sürdürme konusundaki menfaatini koruyarak ve ayrıca işçinin sözleşmenin sona ermesinden sonra çalışma özgürlüğünü sürdürme konusundaki menfaatini koruyarak mümkündür.Araştırmada işçinin işverenle rekabet etmemesi koşulunun geçerli olabilmesi için sağlanması gereken beş koşul belirlendi

It is common for employers to stipulate that their employees or workers refrain from engaging in similar work, either with other parties or for themselves, after the termination of their contract. This ensures that the employer's business secrets, which the employee may have become familiar with during their employment, are not used to compete against the employer.The condition of non-competition for the employee post-contract termination presents a clear conflict between two interests: the employer's interest and the employee's interest. This study attempts to reconcile these interests as much as possible by protecting the employer's interest in safeguarding their business from competition by the employee after the contract ends, while also protecting the employee's interest in preserving their freedom to work after contract termination.The research outlines five conditions that must be met for the non-compete clause to be valid. Among the most significant of these conditions is the necessity of a legitimate and serious interest for the employer in enforcing the non-compete clause. Additionally, the restriction on the employee's ability to work must be limited in terms of time, geographical scope, and type of work.The study concludes with several findings, the most important of which is that Islamic jurisprudence is more expansive than the law in granting employees the freedom to work outside of working hours during the contract's term, provided it does not harm the employer. Another key finding is that, even if the employee consents to a perpetual non-compete clause, such consent is not considered valid, as the right to work is a fundamental human freedom that cannot be forfeited under any circumstances.