Ellen Donovan McCann says post-employment benefits are often the first to be amended when businesses experience budget challenges, but employers may have to take more care in changing them if SCOTUS decides that former employees can sue over those benefits.

SHRM

View (Subscription required)

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

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?

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

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

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.

In mid-November, the UAE Cabinet approved a new Labour Law, Federal Law Number 33 of 2021 (the New Labour Law) which will come into force on 2 February 2022 and repeals Law Number 8 of 1980 (the Old Law), replacing it entirely. The New Labour Law consolidates many of the changes which have been introduced by the Ministry of Human Resources and Emiratisation (MHRE) through various regulations over the past five years and also introduces significant new changes, thus amounting to a radical overhaul of labour relations in the UAE.

The Wisconsin Fair Employment Act (WFEA) prohibits employers from discriminating against applicants and employees on the basis of their arrest and conviction records.¹  Generally, an employer cannot make decisions on the basis of an arrest or conviction record unless the crimes “substantially relate” to the circumstances of the job at issue.²  For many years, the state agencies responsible for enforcing this law—the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development (DWD) and the Labor and Industry Review Commission (LIRC)—have taken the view that crimes of domestic violen

Rod Fliegel talks about employee background screenings – the FCRA issues for employers to consider, the importance of providing a pre-adverse action notice and common mistakes employers make.

Workest by Zenefits

View

Employers with operations in California are all too familiar with how state and local officials continue to restrict the access employers have to public records, including criminal history information.¹ For example, lengthy delays in completing standard criminal background checks are now routine in California.² Apart from criminal background checks, many employers rely on motor vehicle record checks (MVRs) to vet candidates for positions that require driving as part of the job.  In Doe v. California Dept.

Dear Littler: You alerted us to some wage & hour and leaves & benefits issues stemming from our “wandering workers” who have scattered across the country during the pandemic, yet continue to work for our Texas-based company.

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.

Sarah Bryan Fask says a decision clarifying when employers can exit union-brokered pension plans “potentially opens up the floodgates for a lot of employer uncertainty.”

Bloomberg Law

View (Subscription required)

Bradford Kelley and Mike Paglialonga explain the basics of wage and hour laws and why it’s critical for business owners to ensure their business complies with federal, state and local laws and regulations.

American Drycleaner

View

Bradford Kelley and Mike Paglialonga explain the basics of wage and hour laws and why it’s critical for business owners to ensure their business complies with federal, state and local laws and regulations.

American Drycleaner

View

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

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.

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 

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.  

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.

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”).

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.

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.)

On April 29, 2024, The Honourable Marc Miller, Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship, announced that effective the fall semester 2024, international students holding a valid study permit will be permitted to work up to 24 hours per week off campus during the school term. The current policy permits international students to work up to only 20 hours per week off campus during the school term.

This change is designed to not only help students gain work experience and offset expenses, but also to address ongoing Canadian labour shortage needs.

UPDATE: On March 21, 2024, Ontario’s Bill 149 - Working for Workers Four Act, 2024 received Royal Assent. The amendments to the ESA made by Bill 149 came into force on the day it received Royal Assent, with the following exceptions:

In a significant decision about workplace drug use, the Connecticut Appellate Court backed an employer’s right to terminate a worker who was impaired on the job by medical marijuana. The decision also clarified the factual basis an employer must possess to justify ordering a drug test based on suspicion of impairment.

Alka Ramchandani-Raj talks to employers about OSHA-recommended accommodations when altering employees’ working hours due to heat-related conditions.

CNN

View

Commenting on a SCOTUS decision, Alka Ramchandani-Raj said a type of OSHA matter that could see a future change in venue may be those involving certain General Duty Clause citations. 

Safety+Health

View 

In R. v. Greater Sudbury (City), 2024 ONSC 3959, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (OSCJ) dismissed an appeal of the trial judge’s decision in which she acquitted the City of Sudbury (City) of various charges under the Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA).

Grant Goerke and Jennifer Chierek Znosko discuss a recent federal court decision that agreed an Illinois employer had the right to enforce a zero-tolerance policy on marijuana use.

Westlaw Today

View (Subscription required)

The Internal Revenue Services (IRS) has announced that beginning in November 2009 it will launch its latest National Research Program (NRP). This NRP will be focused on conducting detailed employment taxes examinations. Approximately 5,000 or more employers are to be randomly selected for audit. In addition to potential "assessments," these audits will provide the IRS with the statistical sample of overall employment taxes compliance. The audit program will be conducted over a three year period with at least 2,000 employment tax audits conducted per year.

The Internal Revenue Services (IRS) has announced a delay in beginning a comprehensive employment tax audit program originally scheduled for November 2009 but now scheduled to begin February 2010. In February, the IRS will launch its latest National Research Program (NRP). This NRP will be focused on conducting detailed employment taxes examinations. Approximately 6,000 employers are to be randomly selected for audit. In addition to potential "assessments," these audits will provide the IRS with the statistical sample of overall employment taxes compliance.

Aki Tanaka talks about how the monthly average working hour per employee went down in Japan after the country started implementing a law limiting overtime in 2018.

SHRM Online

View (Subscription required.)