NLRB Continues Regulatory Ping Pong With New Proposed "Joint Employment" Standard

On September 7, 2022 the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or the Board) issued a new Proposed Rule governing joint employer status. The proposed rule seeks to change the standard for determining whether two collaborating employers will be considered joint employers under the National Labor Relations Act (Act). If finalized, the new rule is expected to take effect in 2023. More ›

Interpreting SCOTUS Precedent, Seventh Circuit Unanimously Rejects the EEOC's Claim That Wal-Mart's Light Duty Program Discriminated Against Pregnant Workers

Seven years after the Supreme Court's decision in Young v. UPS articulated the legal standard required to establish intentional discrimination in the context of pregnancy discrimination, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit unanimously affirmed summary judgment in favor of the employer and its light duty policy, which was limited only to employees injured on the job. If you initially scratched your head and wondered how such a decision could be reached post-Young, we'll help unpack the apparent discrepancy. More ›

Sixth Circuit Decision In Police Officer Termination Case Offers Valuable Insights for Public Employers in Addressing Complaints About Systemic Workplace Concerns

Public employers have interests that differ from private employers. While both types of employers seek to increase their revenues, public employers have additional concerns that can take priority over short-term budgetary interests, such as maintaining public safety. Those interests can conflict with their employees' First Amendment rights to communicate on matters of public concern. In these circumstances, the law must balance the interests of public sector employees to speak on matters of public concern and the interests of public employers in applying proper workplace rules that promote and maintain cohesion, order, and teamwork—especially in the area of law enforcement. More ›

Amendment to New York State Human Rights Law Establishes Toll-Free Confidential Hotline For Workplace Sexual Harassment Complaints

An amendment to the New York State Human Rights Law is set to go into effect on July 14, 2022. The new law directs the New York State Division of Human Rights (Division) to operate a toll-free confidential hotline, during regular business hours, which will provide counsel and assistance to individuals with complaints of workplace sexual harassment. The Division is required to recruit attorneys who have experience in handling sexual harassment matters to provide advice and legal services—on a pro-bono basis—to hotline callers. It should be noted, that participating attorneys are prohibited from soliciting or permitting their employees to solicit on the attorney’s behalf, “further representation of any individuals they advise through the hotline relating to discussed sexual harassment complaint.” More ›

Federal Court Denies Preliminary Injunction in Lawsuit Challenging Florida's Stop WOKE Act

On April 22, 2022, Governor DeSantis signed into law the Individual Freedom Act—otherwise known as the "Stop WOKE Act"—which set to amend several statutes relating to education and employee rights. Scheduled to go into effect on July 1, 2022, the Stop WOKE Act prohibits employers from mandating employees to attend trainings that endorse certain topics regarding race, color, sex, and/or national origin. We previously wrote a byline which explained in further detail what the Stop WOKE Act specifically prohibits. More ›

US Supreme Court Ruling Allows California Employers to Enforce Arbitration Agreements and Limit PAGA Claims

The United States Supreme Court's recent decision in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana, No. 20–1573 (June 15, 2022) benefits California employers as it will make it easier for them to enforce arbitration agreements related to claims under California's Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) and limit class actions and quasi-class actions. More ›

Third Circuit Ruling Helps Clarify Reasonableness of Accommodations in Resolving Conflict Between Work Requirements and Employee Religious Beliefs or Practices

It just got harder to get out of working on the Sabbath on the basis of religion. The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit recently issued its opinion in Groff v. Dejoy, rejecting a mail carrier's repeated attempts to avoid working on Sundays due to his religious beliefs. The Court's opinion centered on the reasonableness of accommodations that would adjust an employee's work schedule for religious reasons and ultimately concluded that granting Groff's request for a blanket exemption from Sunday work would have placed an undue hardship on the United States Postal Service. More ›

General Counsel of NLRB Seeks to Revoke Right of Employers to Recognize a Union on a Voluntarily Basis and Insist on a Private Ballot Election

Voluntary recognition of a union as the exclusive bargaining representative for employees within an identified bargaining unit of the employer can have potentially game-changing consequences for an employer. However, if the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or Board) agrees to adopt the position of its General Counsel in a brief filed on April 11th in Cemex Construction Materials Pacific, LLC, No. 28-CA-230115., the landscape regarding union representation of employees in the workplace will change dramatically. It will become much easier for unions to organize and more difficult for employers to insist upon a private ballot election. Employees also will lose the right to vote in a private ballot election in many situations. More ›

U.S. Supreme Court Removes Prejudice Requirement From Arbitration Waiver Test

In deciding Morgan v. Sundance, Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court has resolved a circuit split, answering the question of whether a party must show prejudice when arguing that the opposing party waived its right to compel arbitration. Previously, all federal circuit courts except the Seventh and D.C. Circuits used an arbitration-specific waiver rule that requires a showing of prejudice. The Supreme Court has now eliminated this requirement. More ›

New York City Salary Transparency Law Receives Clarification and Subsequent Amendment

The pending Salary Transparency Law (the Law)—which requires New York City employers to disclose the minimum and maximum salary when posting an advertisement for a job, promotion, or transfer opportunity—was  further clarified by the New York City Commission on Human Rights and subsequently amended by the New York City Council. More ›