Skip to main content

Employment, Labor & Benefits

Viewpoints

Filter by:

This week, the California Supreme Court rejected the old “totality of circumstances” test to determine if a worker was properly classified as an independent contractor in favor of a new “ABC test” under which employers will be required to classify most workers as employees.
In the wake of the #MeToo movement and the nationwide discourse over the prevalence of sexual harassment in the workplace, New York State and New York City have taken aggressive steps to implement stronger protections against workplace harassment.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued an important decision last week in Rizo v. Yovino, holding that an employer may not use an employee’s prior salary history to justify gender pay disparity under the federal Equal Pay Act. Aileen Rizo was hired as a school teacher in Fresno County in 2009.
On April 3, 2018, the Department of Justice Antitrust Division (“DOJ” or “Antitrust Division”) filed an antitrust complaint against Knorr-Bremse AG (“Knorr”) and Westinghouse Air Brake Technologies Corporation (“Wabtec”) for agreeing not to “solicit, recruit, hire without prior approval, or otherwise compete for employees” (collectively, “no-poach agreements”).
As reported by our sister blog, ADR: Advice from the Trenches, the Northern District of Illinois recently issued an unusual decision. After finding that both plaintiffs were bound by arbitration agreements with the defendant and after finding that the plaintiffs’ claims were within the scope of the arbitration clauses, it denied defendant’s motion to compel arbitration.
The Massachusetts Department of Unemployment Assistance (DUA) has begun assessing Employer Medical Assistance Contribution (EMAC) supplemental payments for the first quarter.
Back in July 2016, the Massachusetts legislature passed an Act to Establish Pay Equity (Mass. Gen. Laws c. 149 § 105A, referenced herein as the “Law”), which amends the Massachusetts Equal Pay Act (“MEPA”) and serves to bolster gender-based pay inequity protections provided to employees and to generally address gender pay inequality in the Commonwealth.
On April 19, my colleague Andrew Bernstein and I will be discussing the increasingly complex web of federal, state, and local leave and accommodation laws that employers must navigate.

The Bubbler - April 2018

April 11, 2018| Blog

Lots to talk about in the Labor & Employment world!  The Massachusetts Pregnant Workers Fairness Act went into effect on April 1, 2018, imposing stricter non-discrimination rules on employers of pregnant workers.
What’s a financial advisor to do? On March 15, 2018, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in Chamber of Commerce of the U.S. v. U.S. Dep’t. of Labor, No. 17-10238, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 6472 (5th Cir. Mar. 15, 2018) vacated – thereby invalidating – a series of seven rules (which we collectively refer to in this post as the “fiduciary rule”) issued in April 2016.
Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review a decision by the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals holding that a multi-month leave of absence is beyond the scope of a reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
Given the ever-increasing reliance on digital technology, employees are more and more tethered to their smartphones – checking email during their commute, at the dinner table, and even from their beds – essentially creating a never-ending work day.  A bill filed by a New York City councilman aims to curtail this trend.
Now that the Massachusetts Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) went into effect April 1, 2018, it is time for employers to confirm that they are taking steps to ensure compliance with the PWFA.
In a March 30, 2018 Bloomberg BNA article, Mintz Levin Employment, Labor and Benefits attorney Gauri Punjabi discusses Massachusetts’ new protections for pregnant workers and compares them with the existing federal requirements. This is an important development in Massachusetts, and one that we expect to expand to other jurisdictions.
On Monday of this week, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit when it ruled in Encino Motorcars, LLC v. Navarro that auto dealership service advisors are exempt from the FLSA’s overtime requirements.
Join us in a discussion on the increasingly complex landscape of employee misclassification as we explore best practices to help your company avoid the costly pitfalls and time consuming litigation that can result from this expensive mistake. An estimated 3.4 million employees are misclassified as independent contractors when they should be reported as employees.
Join me in a discussion on the increasingly nuanced landscape of employee workplace investigations and best practices in managing their effect on corporate brand, attorney-client privilege and obligations to applicable governmental entities. The current wave of public disclosure of workplace misconduct highlights the intersection of legal compliance and employee relations.
The New York City Council recently passed a bill that will require employers to grant two temporary schedule changes per calendar year to employees for qualifying “personal events.” The law will take effect on July 18, 2018 and will add to the increasingly complex obligations of employers to track and respond to employee leave requests.
Join me and a panel of corporate counsel and human resources professionals to discuss the #MeToo movement and its impact on the HR function at Mintz Fourth Annual Employment Law Summit in New York City on April 19, 2018.
The contraceptive mandate, one of the more controversial provisions of the Affordable Care Act, continues to make news as various stakeholders duke it out in and out of court.
Sign up to receive email updates from Mintz.
Subscribe Now

Explore Other Viewpoints: