Employment

The employer community was sent into a frenzy with the Department of Labor’s release on May 18, 2016 of its final white-collar overtime regulations.  Just two days before however, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission also released its own final regulations regarding employer wellness programs.

A couple of weeks ago, you wrote me about an employee who will be engaging in a six-month temporary assignment around Europe to scope market opportunities. The employee was Abbie Absent-Minded.

While many employers shifted some of their focus to the new overtime rules in the past couple of weeks, cybersecurity remains top of mind for most.  The reason?  Because the number one threat to a company's information (personal or confidential) is still its own employees.

One of the few “wins” for employers under the DOL’s new overtime rule was that employers are now allowed to apply “nondiscretionary incentive payments” to meet up to 10 percent of the new salary threshold.  This change could prove very important for employers who pay employees on a commission basis or who use other incentive-based compensation.

As we reported earlier, the DOL has now released its final overtime rule. Two of the biggest takeaways are that the new rule (1) greatly increases the minimum salary threshold of the so-called “white collar” exemptions (at least $913 per week, equaling $47,476 annually); and (2) made no changes to the exemptions’ separate job duties’ tests.

Last month the U.S. Department of Labor published a suite of final regulations governing the fiduciary status of, and prescribing conflict of interest rules that apply to, persons who provide investment advice to ERISA-covered retirement plans and Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs).

Many employers are familiar with the fact that the EEOC regularly conducts on-site workplace investigations after receiving charges of discrimination or harassment.

My colleague Patricia Moran, wrote a Law360 article entitled In The ACA Age, Employee Handbooks Can Help — Or Hurt as a follow up to her latest post, Have You Reviewed your Employee Handbook for Affordable Care Act Compliance? In the article, Moran urges employers to review their health and welfare benefit documentation for ACA compliance.

Relying on its precedent, the First Circuit Court of Appeals held for the second time this year that the Federal Aviation Administrative Authorization Act of 1994 (“FAAAA”) preempts application of the Massachusetts Independent Contractor Statute, M.G.L. c. 149, Section 148B, to couriers working for Federal Express and other same-day delivery companies.

Over the course of this and next week, we will discuss the final overtime rule’s impact and address related workplace issues on which employers should focus in advance of its December 1st implementation date.  Today we focus on the rule’s impact on non-profits and educational institutions. 

Last week, the U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) issued a final rule aimed at updating the way it collects data and preventing workplace injuries and illnesses.

I understand that one of your employees will be engaging a six-month temporary assignment around Europe to scope market opportunities, and you’d like to have a better understanding of what to be thinking about in terms of privacy.  Great question!

The wait is over! This morning, the Department of Labor announced its Final Rule, which is aimed at expanding overtime eligibility for millions of American workers. At its core, the final version of the rule doubled the minimum salary employers must pay “white collar” workers to maintain their exempt status.

My colleague David Barmak was featured in the NPR program, Marketplace in which he examines the negative implications of changing the white-collar overtime rules so that more white-collar workers are eligible for overtime. The program provides an overview of the rule and its impact on the wage gap and service industry.

With this post, we begin our substantive explanation of the Department of Labor’s suite of final fiduciary and conflict of interest regulations. For the financial services industry, and for the retirement plans and IRAs, there are game-changing rules.

Last month, a California state appellate court issued a decision that, as the dissent characterized, went “where no one has gone before.

As a recent federal appellate decision confirmed, the Americans with Disabilities Act does not require employers to always accommodate a disabled employee.  Instead, it is the employee’s burden to first show that he or she can perform the essential functions of the job with said accommodation.

Does this sound familiar: employee disregards a non-compete and joins a competitor; former company calls foul and initiates a lawsuit; parties fight it out, but by the time litigation has run its course, the non-compete period in the underlying contract has expired.  The dispute is moot, right?

The Fifth Circuit recently held that a third party witness who was fired after providing information in response to her employer’s investigation of a coworker’s harassment allegations had to demonstrate she had a “reasonable belief” that the conduct she reported violated Title VII in order to prove her retaliation claim.

The New York City Human Rights Law now prohibits discrimination based on an individual’s actual or perceived status as a caregiver.  Below, we briefly summarize the law and gauge its potential impact on the workplace.