Stephanie Chavez offers advice to employers who are considering hiring individuals who have a criminal record.

Law360 Employment Authority

View  (Subscription required.)

Libby Henninger offers tips for employers paying disabled workers lower wages.

Law360 Employment Authority

View (Subscription required.)

This year has seen a number of international and regional legislative efforts imposing human rights due diligence and transparency obligations on multinational employers. 

Natasha Adom weighs in on racism experienced by former cricket player Azeem Rafiq.

Personnel Today

View (Subscription required.)

On December 23, 2021, President Joe Biden signed into law the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act (the “Act”),¹ which bars the importation into the United States of products made from forced labor in the Xinjiang region of China.  This Act will significantly impact many multinational employers’ supply chains because raw materials from this region – such as cotton, coal, chemicals, sugar, tomatoes and polysilicon (a component in solar panels) – have found their way into many global supply chains.  Indeed, these materials arrive on U.S.

On April 1, 2022, a Los Angeles County Superior Court ruled that California Assembly Bill 979—a bill designed to increase diversity and improve the persistently low number of underrepresented groups on corporate boards—violated the Equal Protection Clause of the California Constitution and was therefore unenforceable. In its ruling, the court acknowledged the pitfalls of homogeneity in business and communities, but it cautioned against quotas and specific number requirements.

Miguel Arberas explains that those who lie about their training and training to get a job can be dismissed even if there is no damage. 

EL PAÍS

View

On December 29, 2022, President Biden signed a new whistleblower law that significantly increases the risk and cost of whistleblower claims for domestic and overseas financial services institutions that must be cognizant of anti-money laundering (AML) laws and regulations. This covers 26 categories of institutions, including banks, branches and agencies of foreign banks, broker-dealers, insurance companies, operators of credit card systems, mutual funds, certain casinos, and travel agencies.

As workplace issues have become more complex, human resource professionals and managers often turn to employment lawyers for advice in sorting out matters involving the interaction between business requirements and the requirements of employment laws and regulations. When is such advice protected from disclosure under the attorney-client privilege?

Speaking about I-9 retention periods, Jorge Lopez advises employers to be prudent and make a purge process part of the I-9 compliance module.

SHRM Online

View (Subscription required.)

On June 1, 2023, in United States ex rel.

The Massachusetts legislature has expanded the reasons employees can use Massachusetts Earned Sick Time through provisions in a larger bill entitled, “An Act Promoting Access to Midwifery Care and Out-of-Hospital Birth Options.”  Employees may now use Massachusetts Earned Sick Time to “address the employee’s own physical and mental health needs, and those of their spouse, if the employee or the employee’s spouse experiences pregnancy loss or a failed assisted reproduction, adoption or surrogacy.”

In 2017, companies in Brazil welcomed changes to its labor code that introduced the option for securing enforceable releases to employment law claims. The changes to the labor code included allowing parties to seek a ratification of a private settlement with the labor courts. The rationale behind the new law was to permit parties to settle matters in an amicable way, thereby reducing judicial disputes.

On September 18, 2024, Canada announced that it would impose new language and field of study eligibility requirements on its Post-Graduation Work Permit (PGWP) Program.

On October 1, 2024, Maryland’s Pay Stub/Pay Statement and Pay Transparency laws went into effect. The laws were passed during the General Assembly’s 2024 legislative session and amended the state’s Wage Payment and Collection Law and Equal Pay for Equal Work law, respectively.

Pay Stub/Pay Statement Law Requirements

At the November 5, 2024 election, California voters will determine the fate of Proposition 32, which proposes to increase the state minimum wage and provide for automatic future adjustments tied to inflation.

This Littler Lightbulb highlights some of the more significant employment law developments in federal courts of appeal in the last month.

Fourth Circuit Rejects ADA Claim of Employee Who Tested Positive for Illegal Drugs to Treat Anxiety and Muscle Spasms

The latest binge watch for many of us at GQ|Littler was the Netflix hit, “America’s Sweethearts: Dallas Cowboys Cheerleaders,” which follows a year in the life of NFL’s Dallas Cowboys cheerleading team.

As artificial intelligence (AI) continues to transform the workplace, lawmakers and agencies are grappling with how to regulate its use in employment settings, from hiring practices to employee monitoring. The next administration’s approach to AI regulation will help shape the balance between innovation and worker protection, with each political party offering distinct views on the role of government oversight. A shift in power could lead to changes in how the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), the U.S.

Attorneys Colette Kopon and August Johannsen join Pro Bono Committee Member Lavanga Wijekoon in discussing their participation in Littler’s pro bono clinic, held in collaboration with the National Immigrant Justice Center, focused on assisting migrant families seeking asylum in the U.S.

On June 29, 2024, Governor Newsom signed into law an amendment to California Code 1770, clarifying the scope of SB 478. Under SB 478 and previously published guidance from the attorney general, California restaurants were effectively prohibited from charging service fees or other surcharges, which many restaurants have implemented to offset rising costs, unless the amount of the service fee was specifically identified as part of the listed prices.

On October 4, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services (Case No. 23-1039) to decide whether plaintiffs who are members of historically majority communities asserting “reverse discrimination” claims under Title VII must show there are “background circumstances” that support the inference that the defendant is the “unusual employer who discriminates against the majority.”

The “Background Circumstances” Requirement

Voters in several states will decide whether marijuana or, in one case, psychedelic substances should be legal in the upcoming November 5, 2024 general election. Employers should keep their eyes on these ballot measures and prepare for questions regarding changes to workplace policies if some or all of them pass. A rundown of the ballot measures in these jurisdictions follows.

Marshall v. Mercantile Exchange Corporation, 2024 CanLII 71128  (ONSC), is an action for wrongful dismissal where the employee claimed he could not mitigate his damages by seeking alternative employment indefinitely because of a mental health condition (i.e., stress and depression) allegedly arising out of his termination. He claimed a 26-month notice period. The employer sought an independent medical examination (IME) of the employee pursuant to s.

A number of Littler lawyers in our office in Toronto, Ontario, Canada recently authored the Ontario section of Employment: North America for Lexology, Getting The Deal Through.

This publication provides an overview of labour and employment law in Ontario, Canada, focusing on the following categories: 

European companies are navigating a variety of social and equality-related issues impacting their workplaces and, according to Littler’s second annual European Employer Survey, are increasingly channeling their concerns into concrete actions.

This Annual Report on EEOC Developments—Fiscal Year 2019 (hereafter “Report”), our ninth annual publication, is designed as a comprehensive guide to significant EEOC developments over the past fiscal year. The Report does not merely summarize case law and litigation statistics, but also analyzes the EEOC’s successes, setbacks, changes, and strategies. By focusing on key developments and anticipated trends, the Report provides employers with a roadmap to where the EEOC is headed in the year to come.

This year’s Report is organized into the following sections:

Due to the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, governments across the world have implemented various measures to slow the spread of the virus, protect workers’ health and safety, and assist employers to recover from the economic crisis, among other programs.

Employers with employees in Ontario often ask about legislative requirements under various employment statutes, including mandatory policies, training and postings under the Employment Standards Act, 2000, the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997, the Occupational Health and Safety Act, the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005, the Pay Equity Act, and the Smoke-Free Ontario Act, 2017.  To make this information conveniently available, the Littler Toronto office assembled these requirements in a single publication. 

Many employers are hopeful that a vaccine for COVID-19 will be the silver bullet that will enable employers to return to some semblance of a pre-COVID workplace. Assuming a vaccine is developed, can an employer mandate that employees be vaccinated before coming back to work? What happens when an employee cannot or will not take this vaccine, either for religious, medical, or other personal reasons? Can a union or group of workers successfully challenge employer-mandated vaccines?

Government-ordered office closures that swept much of Europe early in 2020 appear to have helped convince employers across the continent that workers could be just as productive remotely as they could while gathered in offices.

Employers with employees in Ontario often ask about legislative requirements under various employment statutes, including mandatory policies, training and postings under the Employment Standards Act, 2000, the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997, the Occupational Health and Safety Act, the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005, the Pay Equity Act, and the Smoke-Free Ontario Act, 2017.  To make this information conveniently available, the Littler Toronto office assembled these requirements in a single publication. 

With COVID-19 cases surging and the changing tides in Washington, D.C., employers have a lot on their minds going into 2021. Littler’s latest survey of nearly 1,100 in-house counsel, HR professionals and C-suite executives finds employers focused on the implications of the extended remote work environment and the workplace policy changes ahead under a new presidential administration.

Workforce reductions, whether in the form of hours reductions, furloughs, or layoffs, are often a last resort for employers experiencing financial pressures. Nevertheless, when these actions are necessary, time typically is of the essence, because when shedding payroll is the objective, the more drawn out the process, the smaller will be any financial savings. But quick decisions need not be careless decisions. The key is to thoroughly understand the risks before making decisions that later may result in potential liability.

The COVID-19 vaccine breakthroughs in late 2020 brought hope that the pandemic’s end could be in sight, but a return to normalcy will require widespread inoculation, raising an urgent question: Should employers mandate COVID-19 vaccinations for their workers?