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

Zev Eigen comments on the value of data in making decisions on compensation.

HR Dive

View Article 

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.)

Andrea M. Kirshenbaum and Jennifer N. Capozzola dive into the U.S. DOL’s final rule (2024 IC Rule) for analyzing whether a worker should be classified as an employee or independent contractor under the FLSA and the lawsuits and challenges that remain in its path. 

The Legal Intelligencer

View

What do you get when you combine a business-backed ballot initiative, the state legislature and governor’s office, and labor organizations? A deal. California style.

In RAV Truck & Trailer Repairs, Inc., 372 NLRB No. 25 (Dec. 14, 2022), the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued a supplemental decision in a case that will have implications for employers seeking to close shop, especially those operating in multiple locations.

Michael Lotito weighs in on the U.S. Department of Labor's Wage and Hour Division’s key proposals and nominations.

Law360 Employment Authority

View (Subscription required.)

On August 8, 2023, the Governor of Puerto Rico signed into law Act No. 85-2023, effective immediately. The statute amends Puerto Rico’s Workers’ Compensation Act by further incentivizing safe workplaces.

Stephen T. Melnick discusses the Massachusetts Department of Industrial Accidents (DIA)’s revised workers’ compensation notice for employees, which Massachusetts employers will start using Sept. 16, 2024.

SHRM

View (Subscription required)

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).

House Education and Labor Chairman Bobby Scott (D-VA) recently introduced legislation that seeks to provide aid to multiemployer pension plans (MEPs) facing insolvency. Entitled the Emergency Pension Plan Relief Act (EPPRA), the bill would fund this aid directly from the U.S. Treasury.

Sarah Bryan Fask provides insight on multi-employer pension plans. 

DCReport

View Article 

On March 11, 2021, President Biden signed into law the $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, which includes the Butch Lewis Emergency Pension Plan Relief Act of 2021.  This law is designed to forestall the insolvency of approximately 100 multiemployer pension plans that were expected to run out of money necessary to pay vested benefits over the next 20 years.  Included among these funds is a particularly large fund that – absent congressional intervention – would have gone insolvent by 2025, leaving millions of retirees without their expected monthly pension. 

Sarah Bryan Fask shares her insight about the future of pension plans for unionized employees.

Bloomberg Law

View Article (Subscription required.) 

Sarah Bryan Fask explains how the special financial assistance will affect union-brokered pensions.

Bloomberg Law

View (Subscription required.) 

Sarah Bryan Fask talks about the federal government’s temporary rescue of more than 200 union-brokered pension plans.

Bloomberg Law

View (Subscription required.)

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.

Ole Kristian Olsby and Nina Elisabeth Thjømøe explain Norway’s new Anti-discrimination Tribunal.

International Law Office (ILO)

View Article (Subscription required.)

In Schachter v. Citigroup, Inc.,¹ the California Supreme Court rejected claims that an incentive plan that conditioned the earning of restricted stock based on continued service was unlawful where the employee voluntarily elected to participate in the plan, and the employee quit before the date on which the incentive was earned. The plan was lawful even though the incentive plan was funded from wages that the employee would have otherwise received in cash.

On July 21, 2010, President Obama signed into law the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (H.R. 4173) (the "Act"), which is intended "to promote the financial stability of the United States by improving accountability and transparency in the financial system" and "to protect the American taxpayer by ending bailouts, to protect consumers from abusive financial services practices, and for other purposes." While the Act is directed at the financial system, it incorporates broad executive compensation provisions that apply beyond the financial services industry.

The recently enacted Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act ("Dodd-Frank") mandates, for publicly traded companies, shareholder advisory votes on compensation packages provided to top executives and on "golden parachute" packages payable in connection with corporate transactions.

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) released proposed rules on March 2, 2011, in connection with provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act that prohibit "covered financial institutions" from providing incentive-based compensation that encourages inappropriate risks, by providing either excessive compensation or incentives that could lead to material financial loss to the institution.

Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code (the "Code") generally limits the deductibility of compensation paid by a publicly traded corporation to its top executive officers (the "covered employees") to $1 million annually (the "Million Dollar Cap"). However, this limit will not apply to certain amounts that qualify as "performance-based compensation." Compensation attributable to stock options, stock appreciation rights ("SARs") and restricted stock grants may qualify as performance-based compensation if they meet certain requirements.

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has adopted a final rule requiring publicly traded corporations to disclose, to the SEC and shareholders, the ratio of CEO compensation to the "median compensation" of the corporation's employees (except the CEO).

The Internal Revenue Service recently issued proposed regulations under Section 457 of the Internal Revenue Code (the “Code”) that prescribe rules regarding deferred compensation plans sponsored by state and local governments and tax-exempt organizations.  These regulations relate primarily to the taxes imposed (under Code Section 457(f)) on the organization at the time the individual’s right to compensation vests, without regard to actual time of payment. 

Monica Schiaffino contributed an overview of the primary sources of law that govern or affect executive compensation arrangements or employee benefits in Mexico.

Getting the Deal Through

View Article

Updates: On November 12, 2020, in James Anthony Manastersky v.

Enacted on Friday, March 27, 2020, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (H.R. 748, the “CARES Act” or the “Act”) is intended to stimulate the U.S. economy in light of the COVID-19 pandemic. The CARES Act contains a number of provisions relating to employee benefits and executive compensation, which are summarized below.

Retirement Plan Provisions

As many employers are on the way to normalizing their business practices and re-engaging their employees, they should not overlook the many potential pitfalls in the administration of their retirement, health and welfare plans and their executive compensation arrangements. The risks of missteps are high, and include loss of tax-qualification of retirement plans, penalty taxes in connection with the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) employer mandate rules, other IRS penalties, employee lawsuits and Department of Labor enforcement actions.

As required under the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 2015, the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced, through the Federal Register, increases for penalties under the Immigration Reform & Control Act (IRCA), effective February 13, 2024. Interestingly, the Federal Register announcement for DOJ increases also included penalties for sections of IRCA administered by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE).

In the first major action of 2024, the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced it had entered into a three-year deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) with a publicly traded global software company for alleged violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). The January 10, 2024 announcement described the company’s agreement to pay more than $220 million in connection with the investigation, consisting of just under $120 million in criminal penalties.  While significant, these fines were reduced based on the pilot program announced by the DOJ last spring, as described below.

On August 18, 2022, the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) issued a revised version of its Directive 2022-01 - Advancing Pay Equity Through Compensation Analysis, which was originally issued on March 15, 2022.

Ben Sandahl discusses a Minnesota case that raises several issues for companies working with independent contractors.

Westlaw Today

View (Subscription required)

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