Skip to main content

Employment, Labor & Benefits

Viewpoints

Filter by:

As we observed in a recent post on the Seventh Circuit’s decision in Hively v. Ivy Tech Community College extending Title VII to sexual orientation claims, the Supreme Court will probably have to resolve the disagreement among the federal circuit courts over whether the statutory language “because of...sex” should be interpreted to include “because of…sexual orientation.”
We had such a spirited panel discussion on pay equity at our Third Annual Employment Law Summit recently that we wanted to follow up with a post addressing the current state of play on pay equity legislation, particularly with respect to salary history disclosure laws. This is a rapidly advancing area of the law in which we continue to see new developments.
Our colleagues at the ADR blog have published the first of a series of posts discussing the dilemmas inherent in attempting to resolve class claims through arbitration. In Is ‘Class Arbitration’ an Oxymoron?
In a landmark en banc decision rejecting its earlier panel ruling, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit became the first federal appellate court to hold that Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination in employment on the basis of sexual orientation.
As we discussed yesterday at Mintz Levin's Third Annual Employment Law Summit, big changes are likely in the offing as all three branches of our federal government begin to deal with labor and employment issues following President Trump’s election.
In a recent case, a Maryland Federal court permitted a plaintiff to proceed to trial on her failure to accommodate claim under Maryland’s Fair Employment Practices Act (MFEPA), finding that under Maryland law the employer was required to perform an individualized assessment in order to determine whether the employee
March Madness presents one of those occasions where your employees’ diets and exercise may fall by the wayside, and by the wayside, we mean potentially off a cliff.  And when this happens, your workforce is increasing not just their weight and risk of disease, but it may also increase your cost to employ them.
It’s been a terrific run.  A real Cinderella story.  Who would have thought that a little blog out of the northeast region could make so much noise in the thought leadership world?!
This past week, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals issued an important decision addressing two on-the-bubble workplace confidentiality policies – one which made the cut, while the other one made its way over to the legal equivalent of the NIT.
The 21st Century Cures Act (Cures Act), enacted on December 13, 2016, provides a new opportunity for small employers to help employees pay for health insurance: the “qualified small employer health reimbursement arrangement” (QSEHRA).
The basketball court isn’t the only place you’ll see interesting uniforms this month.  Many employers choose to implement and enforce their own uniform requirements and dress codes at work.
As excitement builds for the March Madness Final Four on Saturday and the championship game next Monday, another exciting event is also rapidly approaching – Mintz’s Third Annual Employment Law Summit.
The stunning failure of the U.S. House of Representatives to pass the American Health Care Act (AHCA) (which we previously reported on here) has political and policy implications that we cannot forecast.
Wearable technology continues to do a full court press on the marketplace and in the process, the step counters of the world and health apps tied to devices capable of tracking real-time biostatistics, are revolutionizing the way companies think about wellness.
No matter how long you’ve played the game, administering a Reduction-in-Force or RIF is never easy.  In fact, it is often painful not only because they are difficult to administer, but because of the toll it takes on the workplace generally and employees individually.
For employers who want to attract and retain the best talent, a robust benefits package is a must. But with political shifts and changing compliance burdens, keeping up with benefits requirements is a daunting task. First and foremost, employers are concerned about the future of the Affordable Care Act (ACA).
Friendly reminder to our readers that on April 6, 2017, Mintz will be hosting its Third Annual Employment Law Summit at the Princeton Club in New York City.  This half-day seminar will feature as its keynote speaker Liz Vladeck, the Deputy Commissioner for the Office of Labor Policy and Standards at the NYC Department of Consumer Affairs.
March Madness isn’t the only thing we are excited about over here at Employment Matters. Right on the heels of the tournament, we will be hosting our annual Employment Law Summit.
Employers implement employee training programs for a variety of reasons, such as furthering professional development and improving poor performance, ensuring compliance with information security protocols and competence using company systems and reducing legal exposure.
On March 6, 2017, after years of promising, GOP lawmakers in the House of Representatives introduced the "American Health Care Act" (AHCA), the first concrete legislative proposal detailing the initial provisions designed to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act.
Sign up to receive email updates from Mintz.
Subscribe Now

Explore Other Viewpoints: