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)

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

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 

Robert F. Millman has been representing employers in collective bargaining and regulatory
proceedings with unions for 46 years. Daily Journal talks about a few of his big wins.

Daily Journal

View (Subscription required.)

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.)

Libby Henninger weighs in on several wage and hour bills that will be prevalent in the next six months.

Law360 Employment Authority

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.)

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.) 

Keith A. Jacoby explains what makes Mark Rudy a good mediator.

Daily Journal

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 

Update: This bill was signed into law on March 3, 2022.

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.)

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

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

SHRM Online

View (Subscription required.)

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.

Jay Inman says that vital industries, including healthcare, hospitality and manufacturing, will continue to see significant workplace changes in 2023.

The Lane Report

View

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

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.)

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

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.)

Alexander MacDonald explains when California employers’ employment agreements are subject to state law and AB 51 may apply. 

XpertHR

View

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 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”).