Earlier this month, President Biden released his COVID-19 Action Plan, Path Out of the Pandemic (Plan) with the stated goal of getting more people vaccinated.¹ As part of the Plan, President Biden signed Executive Order 14042, Ensuring Adequate COVID Safety Protocols for Federal Contractors (Order).

Meredith Shoop talks about the Affirmative Action Program Verification Interface where covered federal contractors can upload their affirmative action plans for review.

Government Executive

View

On October 11, 2021, Texas Governor Greg Abbott issued Executive Order GA-40, which states that no entity in Texas can “compel” any individual, including any employee or consumer, to receive a COVID-19 vaccination who objects “for any reason of personal conscience, based on a religious belief, or for medical reasons, including prior recovery from COVID-19.”  The order also establishes a maximum criminal penalty of $1,000 but expressly exclude

On September 9, 2021, President Biden signed Executive Order 14042, Ensuring Adequate COVID Safety Protocols for Federal Contractors (“Order”), which directed the executive agencies to begin amending federal contracts to require federal contractors to take specific actions to combat COVID-19 and to, in turn, require covered subcontractors to take the same actions (the federal contractor COVID-19 workplace

On March 31, 2022, the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) issued a new Directive 2022-02.  Its stated purpose is to provide “transparency on OFCCP’s compliance evaluation policies and expectations for contractors”—but upon review, it appears to be a retreat from the standards of transparency, certainty, and efficiency that guided OFCCP from 2017 through 2020.  The new directive radically alters OFCCP’s approach toward compliance reviews and removes guardrails that had been put in place t

Readers will recall that in August 2022, OFCCP published a notice in the Federal Register advising employers that it was the subject of a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request seeking EEO-1 data from all federal contractors, including first-tier subcontractors, for the period 2016-2020.

We’re thinking about rolling out some IE&D initiatives – is that the same thing as an Affirmative Action Plan?

The short answer is no, and there is often confusion between an Affirmative Action Plan, or AAP, and more general and voluntary IE&D initiatives.

On June 5, 2023, the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) published its FY 2023 Construction Corporate Scheduling Announcement List (CSAL). The CSAL includes 250 employers that OFCCP has identified as federal or federally assisted construction contractors.

On August 24, 2023, the Office of Management and Budget approved a request from the U.S. Department of Labor’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) to revise the “Itemized Listing” that OFCCP uses to collect information from federal contractors that are selected for supply or service audits. Among the changes that have been approved is a new requirement that audited contractors:

Alexander MacDonald says Jarkesy's biggest effect on the NLRB might come not from what the court ruled, but from what it decided not to rule on.

Law360 Employment Authority

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.

Alex MacDonald says the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Chevron will likely impact regulatory bodies and the employers they oversee.

Corporate Compliance Insights

View

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 22, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued its decision in Synoracki v. Alaska Airlines, Inc., reviving a class action under the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA).¹ The case was brought by pilots who served in the Air Force Reserves who were seeking from their civilian employer sick leave and vacation accruals during periods of military leave.

Dan Boatright discusses the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal’s decision to strike down the 80/20 labor rule and what that decision means for employers. 

Nation’s Restaurant News

View

David Gartenberg said he is worried about the fact that the rule leaves the FAMLI benefits out of alignment with unpaid Family and Medical Leave benefits allowed under federal law. 

The Sum & Substance

View

Javier Molina discusses the challenges of employers giving employees gifts for Christmas.

Expansión

View

Stephen T. Melnick talks about a new bill that proposes to give a tax credit to businesses in Massachusetts that join a pilot program to explore the possible benefits of a shorter workweek.

WorldatWork

View

Ellen Donovan McCann, Alice Kokodis and Jim Paretti explain the Massachusetts Department of Family and Medical Leave’s new, more employer-friendly guidance.

SHRM Online

View (Subscription required.)

Anne C. Sanchez and Briana M. Swift explain what employers need to know about the San Francisco Health Care Security Ordinance (HCSO), a local ordinance that requires employers to make certain healthcare expenditures on behalf of their San Francisco-based employees.

SHRM

View (Subscription required)

Erin Webber explains how a remote environment requires more leadership responsibility, skills and choices.

The American Lawyer

View Article (Subscription required.) 

Steve Biddle examines the recently expanded Arizona Civil Rights Act (ACRA) as well as new ordinances passed by Arizona cities that expand protected categories and coverage.

SHRM Online

View (Subscription required.)

Raoul Parekh and Natasha Adom write in support of updating laws to help give employers more freedom to create the real change that so many want and promote more diversity and equality in workplaces.

The Law Society Gazette

View

Michael Royal and Alyssa Peterson discuss two new laws that will bring changes for employers in Texas by expanding protections for employees who assert claims of sexual harassment under the Texas Labor Code.

SHRM Online

View (Subscription required.)

Stephanie Chavez offers advice to employers who are considering hiring individuals who have a criminal record.

Law360 Employment Authority

View  (Subscription required.)

Natasha Adom weighs in on racism experienced by former cricket player Azeem Rafiq.

Personnel Today

View (Subscription required.)

The Massachusetts legislature has expanded the reasons employees can use Massachusetts Earned Sick Time through provisions in a larger bill entitled, “An Act Promoting Access to Midwifery Care and Out-of-Hospital Birth Options.”  Employees may now use Massachusetts Earned Sick Time to “address the employee’s own physical and mental health needs, and those of their spouse, if the employee or the employee’s spouse experiences pregnancy loss or a failed assisted reproduction, adoption or surrogacy.”

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.

At the November 5, 2024 election, California voters will determine the fate of Proposition 32, which proposes to increase the state minimum wage and provide for automatic future adjustments tied to inflation.

The Euless, Texas Fair Overtime and Scheduling Standards Ordinance that imposed predictive scheduling obligations on covered employers is no more.   

The Unusual Origin of the Ordinance 

The latest binge watch for many of us at GQ|Littler was the Netflix hit, “America’s Sweethearts: Dallas Cowboys Cheerleaders,” which follows a year in the life of NFL’s Dallas Cowboys cheerleading team.

Attorneys Sarah Coats, Carly Compton, Christina Cordoza, Chris Johlie and Mark Flores share more about the nonpartisan election activities they have assisted with on a pro bono basis with Pro Bono Committee Member Breanne Martell.

As part of the annual National Celebration of Pro Bono hosted by the American Bar Association, Littler is highlighting various pro bono efforts from around the firm. Our attorneys and professional staff demonstrate their commitment to pro bono by providing significant efforts to organizations in their communities.
   

Attorneys Colette Kopon and August Johannsen join Pro Bono Committee Member Lavanga Wijekoon in discussing their participation in Littler’s pro bono clinic, held in collaboration with the National Immigrant Justice Center, focused on assisting migrant families seeking asylum in the U.S.

Pro Bono Committee Member Jenny Schwendemann is joined by Associate Don Nguyen, Customer Success Senior Coordinator Megan Gunn, Director Christie Bhageloe (Veterans Consortium Discharge Upgrade Program) and Associate Corporate Counsel Kate Brown (Amazon) to discuss Littler’s pro bono collaboration with Amazon in support of The Veterans Consortium.

Shareholder Rachel Fendell Satinsky speaks with Pro Bono Committee Member Dave Haase regarding her work with the Pennsylvania Innocence Project over the years.

As part of the annual National Celebration of Pro Bono hosted by the American Bar Association, Littler is highlighting various pro bono efforts from around the firm. Our attorneys and professional staff demonstrate their commitment to pro bono by providing significant efforts to organizations in their communities.
   

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

The novel coronavirus (COVID-19) has created a host of challenges for employers while accelerating fundamental shifts already underway in the workplace. As the pandemic’s many lasting implications for the workplace and the way we work begin to emerge, Littler surveyed more than 900 employers, based in North America and with operations around the world, on their concerns and the actions they have taken in response.

Technology facilitates remote work in ways that, years ago, just were not possible. Take telecommuting. These days, all kinds of jobs that had to be performed at an employer site are now performed remotely. Some call center workers, for example, now work from home using home telephones — no brick-and-mortar call center needed. Some secretaries now telecommute using laptops and the internet. Some teachers now teach remotely using laptops and video links.

The pay gap – or paying women and other historically marginalized groups less for the same or substantially similar work – has long been in the media spotlight. But as employees, boards, consumers, and the public are increasingly expecting more from organizations surrounding diversity, equity, and inclusion, the stakes for employers regarding pay equity continue to rise. Politicians have also taken note.

As part of an employer’s EEO compliance efforts, minimizing the risk of harassment claims should be a top priority. Recent statistics issued by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) indicate that the number of harassment charges has continued to spike upward over the past several years, including the monetary recovery for such claims.

On May 15, 2024, the EEOC issued its annual statistics on charge activity, which indicated the following:

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

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

The Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) is a federal law that governs employment-related background checks.  Most lawsuits asserting federal claims proceed in federal court.¹  The FCRA is atypical in that FCRA claims can proceed in either federal or state court.  A new opinion from a California court of appeal in Hebert v.