That sounds like it applies to a miniscule amount of workers, while many more workers are forced to sign non-competes but get no special treatment (or cash) from their employer for bearing that burden.
On the other hand, in the hedge fund world, bonuses are a big part of comp but generally only base pay is paid out, so in reality you might be say 150K to 250K while your comp in expectation is much, much higher. For a junior dev maybe your bonus is .3x to .6x base but for someone senior, your bonus might be 1x to 5x base or more depending on where you sit in the organization. Therefore sitting out still costs you a lot of money.
You are describing a minuscule world that comprises an insignificant amount of American workers.
I’m sure the Walmart cashier with a non-compete hanging around their neck is much appeased by this.
You describe an enforcement, not legal issue. Even with this legislation, the manager can still verbally threaten the employee.
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/15/upshot/when-the-guy-makin...
Non-compete clauses are not “concerningly common”, these are in fact so rare that NYT couldn’t even point out to a single example of non-compete actually affecting low-wage workers: their leading example of Jimmy Johns is not something that ever been enforced, and I seriously doubt that any worker there is even aware of this clause in the contract (low wage workers don’t read these anyway).
This is data from a longitudinal survey of which the respondents were 32-38 years old when in the 2017/2018 survey.
Scroll down to Table 1 and Chart 2 and it looks as though non-compete agreements affect about 1 in 11 people who make approximately minimum wage (presuming these self-reports are accurate), and increase in frequency from there.
-----
Non-competes for job creators can indirectly impact low-wage workers by preventing a job-providing business from opening in their area.
And while trickle-down economics isn't that powerful of a force, it does exist. When non-competes suppress higher-level wages this has a knock-on effect on lower wages, and a side-effect of reducing the discretionary income the higher wage people can spend into the lower-wage economy.