Thelma Akpan and Katelyn McCombs discuss a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit decision that reversed a long-held understanding of the Equal Pay Act and could have a significant effect on equal pay litigation.

Law360

View (Subscription required.)

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit has spoken, and employers that once relied exclusively on McDonnell Douglas might need to rethink their litigation strategy in employment-discrimination cases.

After a recent Second Circuit decision curbed an ideological organization's ability to bring a case against a DEI program without proving someone had actually been harmed, Cindy-Ann L. Thomas said other courts will take note of the standing rationale.

Law360 Employment Authority

View (Subscription required.)

In the first such decision from a federal appellate court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has ruled the COVID-19 pandemic is not a “natural disaster” that exempts employers from providing advance notice of mass layoffs and plant closures under the WARN Act. The court also opined that the natural-disaster exception requires proof of proximate causation, not but-for causation.¹

Alex MacDonald explains the key questions in the first test of a National Labor Relations Board ruling that threatens to make employers pay more to workers whose rights they violate.

Law360 Employment Authority

View (Subscription required.)

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 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.

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

On February 9, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued its decision in Trustees of IAM Nat'l Pension Fund v. M & K Emp. Sols., LLC, No. 22-7157 (D.C. Cir. Feb. 9, 2024), affirming the district court’s decision to vacate an arbitration award for the employer in a pension fund withdrawal liability case.  The D.C.

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.)

On June 3, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit granted a preliminary injunction prohibiting a venture capital fund from awarding grants based on race and gender. In reversal of the district court, the majority found the grant contest “substantially likely to violate” 42 USC Section 1981, a federal statute enacted as part of the Civil Rights Act of 1866 prohibiting private parties from racial discrimination in contracts.

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 August 23, 2024, in Restaurant Law Center v. U.S. Department of Labor, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit vacated the U.S. Department of Labor’s so-called “80/20/30 Rule” that governed how tipped employees must be paid under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The Fifth Circuit found the Rule was inconsistent with the text of the FLSA, and was arbitrary and capricious. 

On April 4, 2022, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit joined the Ninth Circuit in holding that a plaintiff lacked Article III standing to prosecute her statutory claims under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) in federal court. The Eighth Circuit’s opinion in Schumacher v. SC Data Center, Inc. deepens the split between the circuit courts on standing and increases the chances that the U.S. Supreme Court eventually will have to weigh in on the issue again.

Background: Spokeo and Ramirez

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)

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

Two days before the United States Supreme Court ruled in Bissonnette v. LePage Bakeries Park St., LLC,¹ that the Federal Arbitration Act’s (FAA) transportation worker exemption (meaning the FAA would not apply) extends beyond the transportation industry, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit addressed whether the exemption applies to “contracts of employment” between business entities. In Fli-Lo Falcon, LLC v.

Paul Piccigallo says the Second Circuit panel's unanimous ruling in Herrera v. Comme Des Garçons Ltd has resulted in the filing of fewer motions to dismiss at the initial responsive pleading stages in overtime lawsuits.

Law360 Employment Authority

View (Subscription required)