President Obama to Abandon Recess Appointees to the NLRB

The drama surrounding President Barack Obama’s recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) took an unexpected twist this week as the President announced his intention to nominate three new members.

As we have reported, earlier this year the D.C. Circuit in Canning v. NLRB struck down President Obama’s January 2012 appointment of three members, holding that the President improperly exercised his recess appointments power while Congress was still in session. The ruling has called into question hundreds of decisions rendered when the recess appointees constituted a majority of the board. The Obama Administration has vowed to appeal that ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court. More ›

Federal Court Holds that Hospitals Providing HMO Services to Federal Employees are Federal Contractors at the Same Time the OFCCP Appears to Increase Its Focus on Auditing Health Care Providers

Several years ago, the Federal Office of Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) requested that three Pennsylvania hospitals provide copies of affirmative action plans and other materials required of Federal Contractors. Each hospital had a Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) contract with the UPMC Health Plan to provide medical products and services to United States Government employees pursuant to a contract between the Health Plan and the United States Office of Personnel Management (OPM). The hospitals resisted the audits by the OFCCP arguing that their provision of medical care through the HMO plans did not render the hospitals government contractors or subcontractors and that their contracts specifically stated that the hospitals were not to be considered subcontractors. The Department of Labor’s Administrative Review Board ruled in favor of the OFCCP. More ›

USCIS Reports that H-1B "Cap" for FY2014 has been Reached and Exceeded in just one Week

In a development sure to embolden proponents of comprehensive immigrant reform, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has announced that the annual "cap" on H-1B petitions has been reached within just one week of opening the H-1B filing period. Under current U.S. law, USCIS makes 65,000 regular H-1B visas and 20,000 advanced degree H-1B visas available starting April 1st of each year. As a result, in an annual flurry of activity, employers submit their petitions for H-1B workers on or as soon after April 1st as possible. This year, USCIS reports that it had received 124,000 H-1B cap-subject petitions by April 8th. More ›

H-2B Program in Chaos: DOL's Overreach Leads to halt on most Petitions

The H-2B visa program allows U.S. employers to bring foreign workers to the United States to perform temporary, unskilled, and non-agricultural work. Warm-weather employers across the country—including park districts, amusement parks, and landscaping companies—–rely upon the program to fill out their annual workforce. As of March 22, 2013, however, for reasons explained below, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) has completely halted the processing of most new H-2B petitions. More ›

mployment Contract’s Choice-Of-Law Provision Governs Question of Arbitrability, Court of Appeal Rules

In Harris v. Bingham McCutchen, the California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District held that the drafter of an adhesion contract could not avoid the contract’s choice-of-law provision in determining the enforceability of an arbitration provision.

Harris sued her employer, alleging it had wrongfully terminated her employment after she requested reasonable accommodations for a disabling sleep disorder. More ›

One-Sided Employment Arbitration Agreement Unconscionable, Court of Appeal Rules

In Compton v. Superior Court, the Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, ruled that an arbitration agreement that the employer required an employee to sign as a condition of employment was unconscionable — and therefore unenforceable — because its terms were asymmetrical in the extreme, favoring the employer over the employee.

Among other things, the arbitration agreement required the parties to arbitrate common law contract and tort claims, statutory discrimination claims, and claims for violation of statutes and/or regulations. However, the arbitration agreement excluded workers compensation and unemployment benefit claims. It also excluded injunctive or equitable claims arising from alleged unfair competition and trade secret or confidential information disclosures. More ›