In Escano v. Innovative Financial Partners, LLC,¹ a magistrate judge held that the defendants’ decision to withhold funds from a payment required under a settlement agreement when the plaintiff refused to provide a Form W-9 did not violate the agreement.

We recently reported on the saga that followed the Constitutional Court's ruling of February 8, 2024 on the conditions for applying the partial exemption from payment of withholding tax for employers organizing shift work (CIR/92, art. 275/5). 

The ruling of February 8, 2024, had given rise to fears among many employers whose successive shifts fluctuate in size that they would simply lose the tax advantage, which can represent a reduction of 10 to 15% in the wage costs associated with shift workers. 

Andrea M. Kirshenbaum discusses how Johnson v. NCAA is noteworthy beyond the realm of college athletics for its expansive discussion of the FLSA.

The Legal Intelligencer

View (Subscription required)

Rebecca Goldstein talks about new workplace violence prevention laws in California and New York.

Bloomberg Law

View (Subscription required) 

Bradford Kelley says the U.S. still lacks comprehensive AI legislation, but C-suite executives are taking note of a sharp rise in regulatory activity to address AI use in the workplace.

International Employment Lawyer

View (Subscription required)

Starting in January 2025, California’s Fair Employment & Housing Act (FEHA) will prohibit employers from including a statement in a job advertisement, posting, application, or other material that an applicant must have a driver’s license unless the employer “reasonably” anticipates driving to be an essential job function that cannot be comparably performed by alternative means. The stated purpose of the new FEHA amendment is to help facilitate employment for non-drivers who rely on ride hails, public transportation, biking, and walking as their primary means of transportation.

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)

The United States has announced that Qatar will soon be officially admitted to the U.S. Visa Waiver Program (VWP), allowing visa-free travel to the United States by Qatari citizens for up to 90 days. Per the Final Rule published by the Department of Homeland Security on September 26, 2024, Qatar will be added to the VWP no later than December 1, 2024.

Adam Fiss and Sebastian Chilco review updates to California’s paid leave law.

Wolters Kluwer

View (Subscription required)

Adam Joshua Fiss and Sebastian Chilco discuss a new California law that will eliminate employers’ ability to require employees to use up to two weeks of company-provided vacation before they start receiving paid family leave benefits.

SHRM

View (Subscription required)

Rod M. Fliegel discusses California legislation that further amends the Fair Employment and Housing Act to prohibit discrimination in the hiring process based on the applicant’s lack of a driver’s license.

SHRM

View (Subscription required)

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

Michael Lotito offers insight on the Protecting the Right to Organize Act (or PRO Act), which includes a change to a standard known as “joint employer.”

Entrepreneur

View 

George Vassos explains new rules that broaden and clarify British Columbia’s ability to investigate employment compliance matters and tighten rules for hiring children younger than 16 years old.

SHRM Online

View (Subscription required.) 

In Aponte Valentín v. Pfizer Pharmaceuticals, CC-2018-748,¹ the Puerto Rico Supreme Court reinforced the strong public policy favoring arbitration agreements in Puerto Rico, validating continued employment as implicit consent for such agreements.

On November 9, 2021, in United Food and Commercial Workers Union, Canada Local 333 v.

Rhonda B. Levy and Douglas Sanderson examine Northern Regional Health Authority v. Horrocks, in which the Supreme Court of Canada decided that in Manitoba, human rights disputes arising from the interpretation, application or alleged violation of a collective agreement fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of a labour arbitrator.

Human Resources Director Canada

View 

On April 4, 2022, in Fraser Health Authority v British Columbia General Employees’ Union, 2022 CanLII 25560, Arbitrator Koml Kandola of the British Columbia Labour Relations Board dismissed the union’s grievance respecting the dismissal of the grievor because she was ineligible to work under the order issued b

Since late fall 2021, we have seen a steady flow of arbitration awards emerge in Ontario and British Columbia that consider issues relating to mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policies in the unionized workplace. In this Insight, we provide an overview of key trends in these awards.

Rhonda B. Levy and Barry Kuretzky provide an overview of key trends in arbitration awards in Ontario and British Columbia since fall 2021 that have considered issues relating to mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policies in the unionized workplace.

Human Resources Director Canada

View (Subscription required.)

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

Christine Sargent writes about an Oregon Supreme Court case that affirmed the importance of implementing enforceable arbitration agreements.

SHRM Online

View (Subscription required.)

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

Rhonda B. Levy and Barry Kuretzky discuss a case in which an arbitrator issued the first award in Ontario to address and uphold the reasonableness of a hospital vaccination policy that allows employers to terminate employees for non-compliance.

Human Resources Director Canada

View (Subscription required.)

Theodora Lee said overall case filings in the San Francisco state trial court have been down significantly compared to pre-pandemic levels, but she’s seeing an uptick in labor and employment law cases.

The Recorder

View (Subscription required.)

Rhonda Levy, Adrian Jakibchuk, Barry Kuretzky and George Vassos comment on an arbitrator’s ruling that federal employers can count employees’ sick leave credits as paid medical leave days under the Canada Labour Code (CLC) if their own program provides “a more favourable benefit” to workers.

Human Resources Director Canada

View

Alexander MacDonald discusses a case in which the ACLU, sharp critic of arbitration, is arguing that individual arbitration plays a “fundamental role” in protecting labor rights.

The Federalist Society

View

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.

On July 22, 2021 the Puerto Rico Department of Health (PRDOH) issued Administrative Order No. 2021-509 (AO) providing that, in order to physically attend school, post-school educational institutions, or universities, personnel and students age 12 and older must be vaccinated against COVID-19. According to the PRDOH, the vaccination requirement for in-person school attendance will play an essential role in controlling the pandemic and providing a safer educational environment for students.

On August 2, 2021, Denver, Colorado Mayor Michael B. Hancock announced that all city employees, as well as private-sector workers in certain “high-risk” settings, must be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 by September 30, 2021. After September 30, unvaccinated individuals covered by this mandate will not be permitted to work onsite or in the field. In order to meet this September 30 deadline, employees covered by this requirement must receive their final doses of the vaccine by September 15.

Who is Affected by the Vaccine Mandate?

David Gartenberg and Danielle Van Katwyk examine a new vaccine mandate in Denver and explain what it means for Colorado employers.

SHRM Online

View (Subscription required.)

On September 29, 2021, National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) General Counsel (GC) Jennifer A. Abruzzo released a nine-page memorandum taking the unequivocal position that “certain Players at Academic Institutions” are employees under Section 2(3) of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).  Refusing to call such players “student athletes,” Abruzzo asserts in the memorandum (GC 21-08) that:

Puerto Rico Governor Pedro R. Pierluisi recently issued back-to-back executive orders (EO) regarding COVID-19. It appears that the third EO was stuck in holiday traffic. This latest EO, like her sisters, amends November’s EO-2021-075 to curtail COVID-19 infections.

Anabel Rodríguez-Alonso and José L. Maymí-González examine Puerto Rico’s new back-to-back executive orders regarding COVID-19.

SHRM Online

View (Subscription required.)

In the midst of declining infection rates and increasing debate over mask and vaccine mandates, on February 7, 2022, Sangamon County Circuit Court Judge Raylene DeWitte Grischow temporarily enjoined COVID-19 mitigation measure mandates that had been imposed by order of Governor Pritzker and related administrative agency rules, affecting nearly 170 school districts. Echoing the concern expressed by the Eleventh Circuit, in its December 2021 Georgia v.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) requires recipient institutions—i.e., any entity receiving funding from the NIH—to have policies that foster a harassment-free environment.

Florida’s most recent anti-“WOKE” legislation places diversity-related work and diversity-focused positions on state campuses under threat.

Governor Ron DeSantis has signed Senate Bill (SB) 266, officially prohibiting the state’s public colleges and universities from spending state or federal money on programs or campus activities that advocate for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI).  The legislation aims to replace “niche subjects” like Critical Race Theory (CRT) and gender studies with “more employable majors,” according to the governor.  The law would also restrict public colleges from providing initiatives like anti-bias, DEI, and cultural competence training for educators, staff members, and students.

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. 

Jim Thelen says the Supreme Court’s Harvard/UNC decision does not directly impact employment law but may impact the way the public, employees, the judiciary, government agencies and opposition groups looking for ways to legally challenge such programs and evaluate them going forward.

University Business

View

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.