Michael Lotito says OLMS’s exploration of ‘split income reporting’ should begin with a review of the SCOTUS decision reversing Chevron.

Bloomberg Law

View (Subscription required)

Alexander T. MacDonald and Joy C. Rosenquist discuss California’s Proposition 22 and a recent California Supreme Court decision that upheld the voter-approved law allowing app-based drivers to work as independent contractors.

Westlaw Today

View (Subscription required)

Stefan Marculewicz weighs in on the possibility of the US government implementing supply chain restrictions amid claims of forced labor in Xinjiang, despite the opposition of the business world. 

Global Times

View 

On March 15, 2024, the EU member states voted in favor of the European Supply Chain Directive (Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive – CSDDD) in the EU Committee of Permanent Representatives (COREPER) after a long back-and-forth. The vote, originally scheduled for February 9, 2024, had been initially canceled and postponed indefinitely. The reason for this was that numerous member states – including Germany – had already announced their abstention from the vote in advance. The final version of the directive is less burdensome for companies compared to the previous draft.

On Wednesday, April 24, 2024, the EU member states in the EU Parliament voted in favor of the European Supply Chain Directive (Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive – CSDDD). This is one of the final steps in a long legislative process. The vote had been delayed several times at the beginning of the year because some EU member states—including Germany—had announced that they would vote against the directive. The planned liability regime of the directive was a particular point of contention.

Content and scope

Mickey Chichester and Natalie Pierce examine how companies may turn to AI and robotics to mitigate disruption and some of the employment implications of such initiatives.

Supply Chain Toolbox

View Article

Barry Kuretzky discusses a recent Ontario Superior Court decision that punished an employer for trying to intimidate an employee through what the judge determined was a meritless counter claim.

Human Resources Director Canada

View (Subscription required.) 

Alexander MacDonald comments on the implications of SpaceX’s lawsuit against the NLRB, which alleges that the board violates constitutional separation of powers and due process protections by wielding different types of authority in the same case.

Bloomberg Law

View (Subscription required.)

On February 26, 2024, the California Supreme Court issued its opinion in Tricoast Builders, Inc. v. Fonnegra, No. S273368 (Cal. Feb. 26, 2024). For employers, the most important takeaway from this case is that the court held a litigant’s waiver of the right to a jury trial can be conclusive if a party seeking reversal of the waiver cannot demonstrate it caused prejudice to the party. The decision makes it more difficult for a party to convince a court to let it back out of a jury trial waiver in a civil case.

Background

Alyesha Asghar said the Supreme Court’s decision in Muldrow v. St. Louis, which will make it easier for employees to pursue discrimination claims over job transfers, does not mean an end to IE&D.

The Washington Post

View (Subscription required.)

In a favorable ruling for employers defending against wage statement compliance claims, the California Supreme Court in Naranjo v. Spectrum Services Inc. (Naranjo) settled an age-old dispute by determining that an employer that reasonably and in good faith believed it was providing a complete and accurate wage statement has a viable defense to a claim for penalties under the California wage statement statute.

Background

As the Supreme Court mulls the Chevron decision, Michael Lotito says whatever the court decides, it’s likely little will change at the ground level of day-to-day enforcement activities.

Law.com

View (Subscription required.)

In Ruiz Mattei v. Commercial Equipment Finance, Inc.,¹ the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico determined that claims under the Unjustified Dismissal Act² and the Workplace Discrimination Act³ are transferable to the employee’s heirs following the employee’s death.

In a recent case issued by the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico (“the Court”), the Court addressed the standard and level of proof that must be presented by employers when raising as an affirmative defense a corporate reorganization. In Segarra Rivera vs. International Shipping Agency, 2022 T.S.P.R. 33, 208 D.P.R. ____ (Mar.

On November 25, 2023, O. Reg. 340/23: TERMINATION AND SEVERANCE OF EMPLOYMENT made under the Employment Standards Act, 2000 (ESA) (Regulation), amending O. Reg.

The U.S. Supreme Court declined to review the Second Circuit’s decision in Laurent v. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, which held that retirees could receive money damages in the form of recalculated benefits in a class action over how the company’s cash balance pension plan calculated lump-sum benefits.

On Monday, January 24, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an opinion in a case of critical interest to employers offering 401(k) or other defined-contribution retirement plans.  In Hughes v. Northwestern University, Case No. 19-1401, the Court voted unanimously to vacate a decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, temporarily reinstating allegations by employees of Northwestern University that the fiduciaries of Northwestern’s retirement plans had violated the duty of prudence required by ERISA.

On September 18, 2024, at the request of the State of Michigan and its attorney general, the Michigan Supreme Court clarified issues relating to future minimum wage rates and minimum cash wage rates for tip-credit employees stemming from an earlier opinion.

UPDATE: On August 21, 2024, the Attorney General and State of Michigan asked the Michigan Supreme Court to clarify – no later than September 15, 2024 – various rulings in its July 31, 2024 decision, e.g.: 1) How the state should calculate CPI adjustments for the preset minimum wage rates in 2025 through 2028; 2) Whether, aside from in 2025, future minimum wage rates will take effect on February 21 or January 1; and 3) Whether the court intended to have the minimum cash wage increase from 80% (2028) to 100% (2029) rather than 80% (2028), 90%

Ole Kristian Olsby and Nina Elisabeth Thjømøe clarify how to actively prevent sexual harassment and unwanted attention in the workplace through a recent Supreme Court ruling.

International Law Office (ILO)

View Article (Subscription required.)

An employer pays its managers an annual salary and in addition provides monthly advances based on an estimate of the incentive bonus the employee appears likely to have earned by the end of the year. However, if the employee's performance declines over time so that the earned bonus ends up being less than the amounts advanced over the course of the year, it seems obvious that the employer should be able to deduct the overpayments from future paychecks.

The Virginia Supreme Court has spoken again on the calculation of damages in a complex employment contract case. In Online Resources Corp. v. Lawlor, No. 120208 (Va. Jan. 10, 2013), the court addressed the expert qualifications required for the valuation of equity following the termination of the chairman and chief executive officer (CEO) ("executive") of a publicly-traded company, as well as the applicability of Delaware Corporations Law to related change in control (CIC) provisions. 

Background

On August 29, 2014, the Texas Supreme Court in Exxon Mobil Corp. v.

On May 20, 2022, the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) published its FY 2022 Corporate Scheduling Announcement List (CSAL) for supply and service contractors. OFCCP has stated that it will immediately begin to send out scheduling letters to some of the contractors on the new list.  This is a change from the past when OFCCP would wait at least 45 days from publication of the list before beginning audits.  See U.S.

On January 20, 2023, the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) published its FY 2023 Corporate Scheduling Announcement List (CSAL) for supply and service contractors. The CSAL includes 452 establishment reviews, 24 Corporate Management Compliance Evaluation reviews, and 24 Functional Affirmative Action Program (FAAP) reviews.

Alyesha Dotson weighs in on the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals’ ruling that private businesses with religious convictions don’t have to follow antidiscrimination laws that protect LGBTQ+.

SHRM Online

View (Subscription required.)

Alyesha Dotson says the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision on affirmative action may result in a less-diverse talent pool for employers in the coming decades. 

Forbes

View 

David Christlieb talks about the Supreme Court striking down affirmative action, as well as its decision in siding with an employee who refused to work.

WGN Radio

View

On June 7, 2024, the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) published its FY 2024 Corporate Scheduling Announcement List (CSAL) for Supply and Service Contractors. The CSAL is a courtesy notification, and the review will start once the establishment receives OFCCP’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approved scheduling letter.