Menu

Showing 14 posts in Labor.

Peering into Hinshaw’s Crystal Ball: How the Trump Administration May Affect Labor and Employment Landscape

With the election of Donald Trump and transition to a Republican administration looming, employers are scrambling to predict what impact Trump will have on labor and employment policy and enforcement initiatives. What employers can expect in the first 12 months of a Trump Administration is unclear, but there likely will be change in the following areas: More ›

Portion of Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces Executive Order Blocked

On Tuesday of this week, a federal judge in Texas granted a nationwide preliminary injunction blocking the portions of President Obama's "Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces" Executive Order. 

That order, signed in 2014 and scheduled to take effect on October 25, 2016, has three discrete parts, each described as being designed to help executive departments and agencies identify and work with contractors who will comply with labor laws while performing federal contracts.  More ›

Seventh Circuit Upholds Tip Credit Pay for Related, Non-Tipped Duties

As those in the restaurant industry know well, federal and state law allow employers to pay tipped employees less than the required minimum wage with the expectation they will receive enough tips to make up the difference. This is referred to as a "tip credit." There has long been a battle within wage and hour suits over whether and when an employee paid under the tip-credit can still be paid the below minimum wage rate while performing "side-work" or non-serving duties that do not directly result in tips from customers. In a decision issued on July 15, 2016, the Seventh Circuit helped clarify the line, finding that an employer did not violate wage laws by paying its servers under the tip credit for side work those servers performed. More ›

Department of Labor's Persuader Rule Convinces No One

Late last month, the Department of Labor published its "persuader" regulation final rule, which significantly strengthens a union's rights under the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act ("LMDRA"). 

Generally, the LMDRA regulates the public reporting obligations of businesses seeking legal and non-legal counsel to oppose or manage relations with unions. A consultant, known as a "persuader," helps an employer navigate organizing drives and labor disputes. Before this final rule, The LMDRA required "direct" persuader activities to be reported, such as meetings between the persuader and employees, but exempted "indirect" activities, such as the preparation of materials for the employer to provide to its employees. More ›

Ninth Circuit Holds that DOL may Expand Regulation of Employers’ Tip Pooling Practices

The restaurant and gaming industry lost a battle in the Ninth Circuit over whether employers that pay their workers at least the minimum wage are subject to Department of Labor regulations restricting tip pooling arrangements. More ›

Amex Employment Arbitration Policy held Unlawful by NLRB

Amex Card Services Company ("Amex") operates a call center in Phoenix, AZ.  Amex required all new hires to sign an acknowledgement form acknowledging receipt and understanding of its Arbitration Policy as a condition of employment.  The policy mandated final and binding arbitration to resolve all employment-related disputes.  The policy also mandated that all claims subject to arbitration be submitted on an individual basis.  More ›

Seventh Circuit Upholds Indiana's Right to Work Act

In 2012, Indiana enacted its Right to Work Act, which prohibits, among other practices, making the payment of union dues a condition of getting or keeping a job. The Act also bars the practice of requiring an individual to join a union as a condition of employment. Three weeks after its enactment, members and officers of the International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 150, AFL-CIO (the "Union") brought suit in federal district court against Indiana's Governor, Attorney General, and Commissioner of the Department of Labor alleging that the National Labor Relations Act preempted the Right to Work Act, and further, that the Act violated the United States Constitution and the Indiana Constitution. The Indiana government defendants moved to dismiss those claims, and the federal district court granted dismissal of the preemption and constitutional violation claims. The Union appealed the dismissal. More ›

Supreme Court Holds Partial-Public Employees Cannot Be Forced to Pay Dues to a Union They Do Not Wish to Join

The United States Supreme Court issued an opinion on June 30, 2014, finding that eight home health care workers in Illinois cannot be compelled to pay dues to a union they do not wish to join. The workers were part of the Illinois Rehabilitation Program (the "Program"), which was designed to prevent unnecessary institutionalization of individuals who can sufficiently be cared for at home at a lesser cost to the state. The Program allows participants to hire a "personal assistant," typically a family member, who provides homecare services tailored to the individual's needs. Illinois state law establishes an employer-employee relationship between the caregiver and disabled customer. While the customer exercises predominant control over the employment relationship, Illinois, subsidized by the federal Medicaid program, pays the assistant's salary.  More ›

D.C. Circuit Court Strikes down NLRB Posting Rule

The National Labor Relations Board (“Board”) had previously passed a rule that employers who were subject to its jurisdiction were required to post on their properties and websites a “Notification of Employee Rights under the National Labor Relations Act.” The posting basically advises employees of their rights to:  More ›

11th Circuit Affirms Denial of Temporary Reinstatement Sought By NLRB

In NLRB v. Hartman & Tyner, Inc., Case No. 12-14508 (11th Cir. April 16, 2013), the 11th Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed a trial court ruling that denied the NLRB's request to have six employees temporarily reinstated to their jobs. The Board charged the employer with discharging the employees because of their involvement in a union organizing campaign. Of interest to employers, the ruling focused on whether the temporary reinstatement of the employees, sought by the Board, qualified as "just and proper" relief under the National Labor Relations Act. 29 U.S.C. sec. 160(j)More ›

Search
Subscribe via Email