In January 2022, the New York State Senate introduced a bill that seeks to impose significant human rights and environmental due diligence and disclosure obligations on fashion retail sellers and manufacturers operating in the state of New York.  As we reported previously, 2021 saw a number of international and regional legislative efforts to impose human rights due diligence and disclosure obligations on multinational employers.

Lavanga Wijekoon and Aki Tanaka explore the significant impact of the European Union’s expected Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) on global corporate responsibility, with a specific focus on its implications for Japanese companies.

Institute for Security and Development Policy

View

The Littler Pay Equity Assessment™ Provides Enhanced Data Analytics to Help Employers Assess Risk and Proactively Identify Solutions

Bradford Kelley comments on a case that he says shows several ways in which USERRA is more far-reaching than other employment anti-discrimination laws even though it gets less attention.

SHRM Online

View (Subscription required.) 

Deemed IDEL No Longer Available

William Foster and Katie Towery share the changes in the legal landscape and how it could result in manufacturers’ increased liability for workplace accidents. 

Industry Today

View 

On January 8, 2021, the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) issued its final rule modifying the calculation of withdrawal liability by multiemployer pension plans.  This final rule amends the agency’s regulations on allocating unfunded vested benefits to withdrawing employers (29 C.F.R. § 4211) and notice, collection, and redetermination of withdrawal liability (29 C.F.R. § 4219).

A federal court in New Jersey recently applied the arbitrary and capricious standard of review for a denial of benefits claim despite the enactment of an anti-discretionary statute in Minnesota, which governed the benefit plan policy. Hocheiser v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32154 (D.N.J. Feb. 22, 2021).

On January 27, 2022, in New York State Teamsters Conference Pension and Retirement Fund v. C&S Wholesale Grocers, Inc., the Second Circuit joined the Third, Seventh, and Ninth Circuits in applying the doctrine of successor liability to claims for withdrawal liability under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). The court did not, however, find successor liability in this case because the acquiring company specifically did not acquire the facility or employees that triggered the liability.

On Friday, July 8, 2022, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued its decision in United Mine Workers of America 1974 Pension Plan v. Energy West Mining Company, joining the Sixth Circuit in holding that the assumptions used by a multiemployer defined benefit pension plan in calculating the amount of withdrawal liability owed by an exiting employer must reflect the actual and projected experience of the plan.

On October 14, 2022, the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC), the federal agency that insures and regulates private-sector defined benefit pension plans under Title IV of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), published a proposed rule governing employer withdrawal liability.

Sarah Bryan Fask explains why attorneys are critical of Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp.’s proposed rule to use interest rate assumptions to determine a withdrawing employer's liability to a multiemployer pension plan.

Law360

View (Subscription required.)

A recent federal appeals court case clarifies that, under ERISA, the regulations governing disability plans’ claims review procedures apply to claims that predate the 2018 changes to the regulations. The decision also serves as a reminder for plan administrators to review their claims review procedures to ensure compliance with the current requirements for a “full and fair review” benefits appeal process.

The Claims Review Regulations

In celebration of Disability Pride Month, Jennifer Duke, Littler Learning Group Director and attorney, talks with Anna Curry Gualano, Littler Principal and co-chair of the firm’s Individuals with Disabilities affinity group, about the importance of disability inclusion and its impact in the workplace for both employers and employees.
  

Littler’s Anna Curry Gualano is joined by her father, Ashley Curry, to discuss their advocacy work in Alabama to update the traditional accessibility symbol to one that is more inclusive and empowering.
  

Following Disability Pride Month, we look to the past, present and future to examine how rights for people with disabilities in the workplace have developed in the UK and could develop further, before giving some practical steps for employers.

A brief history of disability laws

On July 26, 1990, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) was signed into law. On the recent 34th anniversary of the ADA, U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) General Counsel Karla Gilbride and U.S.

Bradford J. Kelley and Sean O'Brien discuss how, on the 34th anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and Justice Department emphasize their commitment to ensuring that emerging technologies and AI comply with ADA standards.

Westlaw Today

View (Subscription required.)

On April 25, 2023, the Office of Management and Budget approved the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs’ (OFCCP) updated form prospective and current employees must use to voluntarily self-identify as an individual with a disability.  The form is applicable to federal contractors and subcontractors subject to Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act, which requires contractors to invite applicants to self-identify as disabled at the pre-offer stage, and to invi

In July, the Third Circuit upheld a District of New Jersey decision to throw out a withdrawal liability assessment, finding the multiemployer pension fund was barred from pursuing its claim because the fund unreasonably delayed notification of a withdrawal liability assessment for 12 years.

Withdrawal Liability Assessments Under ERISA

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

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.

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.

Rod Fliegel co-authors a report that explains negligent hiring, employers’ risks and how they can protect their company. 

Legal Action Center

View

Pennsylvania and Philadelphia recently enacted changes that impact employer criminal background screening.

State Law

Enacted on December 14, 2023, and effective February 12, 2024, Pennsylvania’s House Bill No. 689 amends Pennsylvania law relating to the expungement of certain criminal record information and employer immunity when hiring individuals with expunged records. 

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)

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.)