The times, they are a'changin'. Continue Reading ›
Don't be this employer. (Allegedly.) Continue Reading ›
How much do you know about this burning issue? Continue Reading ›
We gotcher employment law news right here. Continue Reading ›
With some help from Charles Dickens. Continue Reading ›
Will Congress go for it? Continue Reading ›
I am pumped! Are you? Continue Reading ›
The USDOL has issued a handy little guide. Continue Reading ›
Pregnancy and lactation accommodation. Continue Reading ›
Second of two on the FLSA. Continue Reading ›
Next week: Overtime! Continue Reading ›
And that's not all! Continue Reading ›
We're back in business, baby! (Sorta.) Continue Reading ›
"Let's turn over -- a new leaf." Continue Reading ›
"It could have been worse" edition. Continue Reading ›
The new salary thresholds will take effect on January 1. Continue Reading ›
More to come, but here's a peek. Continue Reading ›
DOL official gets his job back. Continue Reading ›
How can I sue thee? Let me count the ways. Continue Reading ›
Happy holiday weekend! Continue Reading ›
How's your employment law history knowledge? Continue Reading ›
The proposed regs were published in this morning's Federal Register. Continue Reading ›
And happy St. Patrick's Day weekend! Continue Reading ›
The salary threshold would be $35,308. Continue Reading ›
The first step has been taken! Continue Reading ›
Here's a summary of what you may have missed over the holiday break. Continue Reading ›
A preview of coming attractions! Continue Reading ›
Yes, that is possible. Continue Reading ›
Let your voice be heard! Continue Reading ›
It's all pretty good news for employers. Continue Reading ›
Of course he does! Continue Reading ›
Remember the 2016 Overtime Rule? They sued over that? Continue Reading ›
Are you in the know? Continue Reading ›
What are you grateful for this year? Here is my list. Continue Reading ›
The feds are talking about NLRB-EEOC coordination, an end to collection of compensation data, and an inflation-indexed salary test for the overtime exemption. Here's the scoop. Continue Reading ›
Yesterday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit granted the unopposed motion of
the U.S. Department of Labor to dismiss as moot the appeal in the “overtime case” of Nevada v. U.S. Department of Labor. The Fifth Circuit order brings that litigation to an end.
The DOL is expected to begin a new rulemaking process and is expected to propose increasing the salary thresholds for the executive, administrative, and (some) professional exemptions to the overtime requirements under the Fair Labor Standards Act — but not by nearly as much as they would have been increased under the Obama Administration rule that has been struck down. Continue Reading ›
Bloomberg BNA reported Friday evening that President Trump has nominated Cheryl Stanton of South Carolina as Administrator of the Wage Hour Division of the U.S. Department of Labor. Ms. Stanton is currently executive director of the S.C. Department of Employment and Workforce, which administers unemployment compensation for the state. She has been a shareholder with the management-side employment firm Ogletree Deakins twice, separated by a period in which she was the principal White House liaison to the U.S. Department of Labor, the National Labor Relations Board, and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission under former President George W. Bush. She is a 1994 graduate of Williams College, and a 1997 graduate of the University of Chicago School of Law. According to the Trump White House, she clerked for Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito when he was on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
Lots going on in the wage-hour area! The USDOL filed a motion to dismiss as moot its appeal of the preliminary injunction blocking the Obama-era overtime rule. Continue Reading ›
How much can you do - and not do - about your employees' personal appearance and grooming? Take this quiz and find out! As usual, I'll have the answers at the end, so if you get one wrong, no one but you will know.
QUESTION 1: If I operate in a jurisdiction that doesn't have a law against appearance discrimination, I can make any rules about appearance and grooming that I want.
TRUE
FALSE
QUESTION 2: My employees are required by OSHA to wear masks on the job. The masks are no good unless there is a proper seal around the employee's mouth and nose. Since facial hair prevents a good seal from forming, we have a no-beard policy. I have one employee who is Sikh and wears a beard for religious reasons. What should I do?
A. Let him keep his beard and pray that the mask will work without the proper seal.
B. Tell him he has to shave the beard off or lose his job.
C. Meet with him and explain that the mask is required by OSHA and the safety rationale for the rule. Talk with him about reasonable accommodations, which might include use of a different type of mask that works with a beard, or transfer to another position that doesn't require use of a mask. After you've talked and perhaps consulted with vendors or safety experts, make a determination of what to do that won't violate the law or endanger his safety while accommodating his beliefs as much as you can. Continue Reading ›
No more pencils, no more books, no more teacher's dirty looks . . . except for one little quiz on employment law issues that come up during the summer. Continue Reading ›
By David Phippen of our Metro D.C. Office.
While the year is still young, here are 15 New Year's resolutions that employers may want to make:
1. Make sure your "independent contractors" are really independent contractors. "Independent contractors" are under scrutiny by the Internal Revenue Service, the U.S. Department of Labor, the National Labor Relations Board, state and local agencies, plaintiffs' lawyers, and union organizers. A misclassification can cost you back taxes, back pay (including overtime), and back benefits, as well as penalties and interest.
2. Review your email policies. The NLRB recently found that employees generally have a right to use employer email systems during non-working time in support of union organizing and concerted activity. The Board's decision means that many employer email use policies, as currently drafted, would probably be found to violate the National Labor Relations Act if an unfair labor practice charge were filed or a union tried to organize employees and argued that the employer's email policy interfered with the organizing efforts. In light of the new "quickie election" rule that the NLRB issued last month, both union and non-union employers would be well advised to review their email policies and revise as needed. (The "quickie election" rule is scheduled to take effect on April 14, but the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other employer groups, including the Society for Human Resources Management, filed suit on Monday seeking to block the rule.)
It's not too late to register for our webinar on the NLRB's new rules on "quickie elections" and employee email use. The webinar, featuring labor attorneys Tim Davis, Jonathan Martin, and Dan Murphy, is from noon to 1 p.m. Eastern tomorrow (January 8). Be there, or be square!
This is Constangy’s flagship law blog, founded in 2010 by Robin Shea, who is chief legal editor and a regular contributor. This nationally recognized blog also features posts from other Constangy attorneys in the areas of immigration, labor relations, and sports law, keeping HR professionals and employers informed about the latest legal trends.
