Kerry E. Notestine, Chad J. Kaldor, Shawn Matthew Clark and Garrick D. Josephs compare and contrast the Maryland WARN Act and its federal counterpart, the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act.

SHRM

View (Subscription required)

Bradford Kelley and Britney Torres predict politics in the workplace will remain an issue beyond the election and so California employers need a long-term plan measures for issues that include voter intimidation and discrimination and employees taking time off to vote.

Law360

View (Subscription required)

Lauren J. Marcus, Amber M. Spataro and Francis A. Kenny discuss New Jersey’s new bill that would require employers to disclose wage or salary ranges and general benefits information in each job posting/advertisement.

SHRM

View (Subscription required)

Bradford Kelley, Sean O’Brien and Alice Wang discuss a new AI framework from the U.S. Department of Labor and what it means for employers. (Subscription required)

Law360

View (Subscription required)

Following other states and cities across the nation, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed Senate Bill 988, the Freelance Worker Protection Act (FWPA), into law on September 28, 2024. This new law aims to provide greater protections to freelance workers (e.g., “independent contractors”).

Kerry Notestine, Chad Kaldor, Shawn Matthew Clark and Garrick Josephs discuss the Maryland WARN Act and compares and contrasts it with its federal counterpart, the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act.

Wolters Kluwer

View (Subscription required)

Employers concerned about the risks and expenses associated with employment litigation have increasingly required their employees to agree to arbitration in the event of a dispute.  Even upon the issuance of the arbitrator’s final decision, however, a court’s intervention may still be necessary.  At the very least, the court can actually enforce an arbitration award, whereas the arbitrator cannot.  Moreover, the losing party in the arbitration may seek to vacate the arbitrator’s decision on limited grounds, or seek further review of the district court’s decision by filing an appeal with th

Over the years, attempts to arbitrate breach of fiduciary duty claims under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) Section 502(a)(2) have had varying results.¹  One court recently recognized that “whether any benefits plan may agree to submit to arbitration and/or whether an individual employment agreement may compel claims on behalf of a benefits plan to proceed to arbitration are not issues of clearly settled law.”²  This issue is before two circuit courts of appeal this year.  So far, the court rulings in the cases seem to provide some guidance while a

Pamela Reynolds’ article discusses whether employers can enforce arbitration of breach of fiduciary duty claims under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) Section 502(a)(2).

Benefits Pro

View (Subscription required.)

Jim Paretti offers his opinion on how things have gone in interactions with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission during the pandemic.

Law360 Employment Authority

View (Subscription required.)

Michael Lotito writes about unions and their allies’ attempts to sneak parts of the Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act into the budget bill.

The Wall Street Journal

View (Subscription required.)

On May 12, 2022, the “Employee and Retiree Access to Justice Act” was introduced in the House of Representatives by Mark DeSaulnier (D-CA).  Senator Tina Smith (D-MN) introduced a companion bill in the Senate. The bill seeks to ban arbitration and discretionary clauses in employer-sponsored benefit plans governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA).

The United States Supreme Court’s decision in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana will dramatically impact employers’ rights to enforce arbitration agreements related to claims under California’s Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA).¹  This decision, which is a significant win for employers with interests in California, will allow employers to compel arbitration of a PAGA plaintiff’s individual PAGA claims.

On July 8, 2022, in Gist v. ZoAn Management, Inc., the Oregon Supreme Court affirmed the decisions of the trial court and court of appeals granting the defendants’ motion to compel arbitration.  The court concluded that because nothing in the arbitration agreement prohibited the plaintiff from being awarded any relief he might be entitled to under Oregon’s wage and hour statutes, the arbitration provision was not unconscionable and therefore enforceable.

Background

The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario recently held a preliminary hearing to determine whether allegations made under the Human Rights Code (Code) fell within the exclusive jurisdiction of a labour arbitrator, or whether the Tribunal had concurrent jurisdiction over employment-related human rights matters in a unionized workplace.  

This Littler Lightbulb highlights some recent labor and employment law developments at the U.S. Supreme Court and federal courts of appeal.

This Littler Lightbulb highlights some of the more significant employment law developments at the U.S. Supreme Court and federal courts of appeal in the last month.

In light of President Biden signing the Speak Out Act, Elizabeth A. Lalik, Lauren M. Bridenbaugh and Jim Paretti say this is a good time for employers to review their policies and practices for handling sexual harassment incidents that fall under all applicable federal and state statutes.

EHS Today

View

Jim Paretti says several new bipartisan laws focused on issues women experience in the workplace may move employers to work on preventing instances that would violate the new measures.

Bloomberg Law

View (Subscription required.) 

This Littler Lightbulb highlights some of the more significant employment and labor law developments at the U.S. Supreme Court and federal courts of appeal over the last month.

At the Supreme Court

Angel Valverde presents issues for development of international arbitration in the U.S., as there are no visas that specifically allow a foreign national to be employed as an arbitrator, attorney or expert witness in an arbitration proceeding.

International Law Quarterly

View

Natasha Jenkins’ alma mater profiles her and her roles at Littler and as the president of Illinois’ Cook County Bar Association (CCBA). 

The Spectator

View

This Littler Lightbulb highlights some of the more significant employment law developments at the U.S. Supreme Court and federal courts of appeal in the last month.

At the Supreme Court

Traditionally, January 1 has been the key date for which employers must prepare to implement new labor and employment compliance obligations for new laws passed within the previous year.  For the past several years, we have reported on employment and labor laws taking effect mid-year. Increasingly, new compliance challenges are not taking a summer vacation.

On June 28, 2023, the California Second District Court of Appeal issued a decision interpreting the scope of California Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.98(a)(1), a recently amended California statute that requires employers to pay all arbitration costs and fees within 30 days of the due date, or risk being in material breach of the arbitration agreement.  In Cvejic v. Skyview Capital, the court held that an arbitrator cannot cure a missed or late arbitration fee payment.

California’s legislature covered a wide array of labor and employment law topics this legislative session. The laws discussed below were signed into law by Governor Newsom and will become effective on January 1, 2024 unless otherwise noted.  This Insight includes highlights of new laws affecting employers and is not intended to cover every new state and local law that was enacted this session.

Employers should begin reviewing these requirements to help ensure compliance with these new laws. Time to update those Employee Handbooks and train the management team!

This Littler Lightbulb highlights some of the more significant employment law developments at the U.S. Supreme Court and federal courts of appeal in the last month.

At the Supreme Court

On April 12, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court addressed whether the Federal Arbitration Act’s (FAA) transportation exemption—meaning the FAA would not apply—only relates to workers within the transportation industry. In Bissonnette v. LePage Bakeries Park St., LLC,¹ the Supreme Court unanimously held Section 1 of the FAA exempts classes of workers who are actively engaged in interstate transportation, even if the individuals are not employed by a company in the transportation industry (the “Transportation Exemption”).

Two days before the United States Supreme Court ruled in Bissonnette v. LePage Bakeries Park St., LLC,¹ that the Federal Arbitration Act’s (FAA) transportation worker exemption (meaning the FAA would not apply) extends beyond the transportation industry, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit addressed whether the exemption applies to “contracts of employment” between business entities. In Fli-Lo Falcon, LLC v.

This Littler Lightbulb highlights some of the more significant employment law developments at the U.S. Supreme Court and federal courts of appeal in the last month.

At the Supreme Court

On May 3, Governor Ron DeSantis signed into law SB 2006 (codified as Section 381.00316, Florida Statutes).  The law prevents business entities from requiring that patrons or customers provide documentation certifying COVID-19 vaccination or post-infection recovery to enter or obtain service from a business in Florida. It also prohibits educational institutions from requiring students or residents, and governmental entities from requiring persons, to provide vaccination passports or proof of post-infection recovery.

William H. Foster and Katie E. Towery examine the impact President Biden’s “America’s Jobs Plan” might have on South Carolina’s growing businesses and workforce. 

Association of Corporate Counsel South Carolina

View 

National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) General Counsel (GC) Jennifer Abruzzo filed a long-anticipated complaint on May 18, 2023 against the University of Southern California (USC), the Pac-12 Conference, and the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), alleging that their failure to use the term “employee” to refer to student-athletes in the university’s student athlete handbook and related social media policies intentionally discourages student athletes from exercising their alleged Section 7 rights as employees under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).

PORTLAND, Maine (May 24, 2023) – Littler, the world’s largest employment and labor law practice representing management, has added James Thelen as of counsel in its Portland, Maine office. Prior to joining Littler, Thelen was a higher education consultant, as well as general counsel and chief legal officer at the University of Maine System, a statewide system of seven public universities. While there, he also served as vice chancellor for strategic initiatives and chief of staff.

Montana Senate Bill 248 went into effect on June 1, 2023. This law allows student-athletes to earn compensation from Name, Image, and Likeness (NIL) endorsement deals and is part of a trend of NIL legislation being passed by states that allow student-athletes to monetize endorsement deals.

This Littler Lightbulb highlights some of the more significant employment law developments at the U.S. Supreme Court and federal courts of appeal in the last month.

At the Supreme Court

The country’s colleges and universities will likely face significant labor cost pressures for the next year, according to a higher ed sector financial analysis released last week by Moody’s Investors Service. 

Maryland has enacted a law allowing student-athletes to earn compensation from name, image, and likeness (NIL) endorsement deals. The law, Md. Code Ann., Educ. § 15-131, went into effect on July 1, 2023, and is part of a continuing trend of states implementing legislation allowing student-athletes to monetize endorsements.

Jim Paretti says two U.S. Supreme Court rulings on discrimination law that changed how employers evaluate religious accommodation requests and ended affirmative action in higher education will affect employers for years to come.

Law360 Employment Authority

View (Subscription required.)

Since 2006, public employers in New York have been required to implement programs to prevent and minimize workplace violence.¹ Public school employers, including public school districts, New York City public schools, Boards of Cooperative Education Services (BOCES), and County Vocational Education and Extension Boards, were previously exempted from the law.

On February 5, 2024, the NLRB’s Regional Director for Region 1, Laura Sacks, issued a written decision finding that Dartmouth’s men’s basketball players are employees under the National Labor Relations Act. Based on their status as employees, Regional Director Sacks found, Dartmouth’s men’s basketball players are eligible to vote in a union election petitioned for by Local 560 of the Service Employees International Union, a labor union that already represents several other more traditional employee groups at Dartmouth.

Tyler A. Sims disagrees with a National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) regional director’s ruling that men’s college basketball players at Dartmouth College are employees for National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) purposes.

SHRM Online

View (Subscription required.)