The NLRB’s Joint Employer Rule Has Arrived

Continuing its trend of restoring standards to the pre-Obama Board era, the National Labor Relations Board issued its final joint employer rule, returning the Board to its pre-2015 joint employer rules, albeit with a bit more guidance. The five-member Board currently has two vacancies.

The rule, published on February 26, 2020, and effective April 27, 2020, takes the Board back to the “substantial direct and immediate control” joint employer test it employed before the 2015 Browning-Ferris decision. Under Browning-Ferris, a business that only exercised “indirect control” over the employees of a contractor or franchisee could be considered a joint employer. This test greatly expanded the circumstances in which a business could be considered a joint employer. The new rule rolls back Browning-Ferris and provides clarity to employers who should now be breathing a sigh of relief. Read More ›

The NLRB Ends 2020 With a Bang!

Over the past few weeks, the National Labor Relations Board issued a series of employer-friendly decisions overturning a number of Obama-Board precedent-changing decisions. While not all of these recent decisions totally restored the law to what it was before the Obama Board’s changes, they all significantly move the pendulum back to near the center. The Board also issued its final rule regarding representation case procedures, something employers have been anxiously awaiting. The following summarizes what has occurred.

1. The Obligation to Deduct Union Dues Ends When the Collective Bargaining Agreement Expires (Again) Read More ›

January 1, 2020, Means New Pay Rules – Are You Ready?

On January 1, 2020, a number of new pay rules will become effective. While these changes may not directly impact many employees, they could cause pay compression under many compensation plans. Pay compression issues trigger employee morale issues, and adapting to those issues may mean that more than just those at the bottom of pay scales will need to have their pay adjusted. This ripple effect, of course, could be costly. Further, if the employees are covered by union contracts, how these new rates are rolled in, and whether pay compression concerns may be addressed, are mandatory subjects of bargaining. While a union contract cannot violate the law, the effects triggered by compliance are subjects of bargaining.

The following will briefly summarize what employers should be aware of and address in some form: Read More ›

Not So Fast – Court of Appeals Invalidates Shortened Limitations Period in Employee Handbook

Employers seeking to shorten applicable statutes of limitations for employment claims through employee handbooks are struck a blow by the Sixth Circuit. In Logan v. MGM Grand Detroit Casino, the Court held that a “contractually shortened limitation period... is incompatible with the grant of substantive rights and the elaborate pre-suit enforcement mechanisms of Title VII... Plaintiff is entitled to a 300-day statutory limitation period.” The result is that employers in Michigan and elsewhere should revise any provisions in employee handbooks or similar policies that seek to shorten the statute of limitations for employment-related claims. Read More ›

Department of Labor Announces Final Rule Changing Salary Level Tests

The U.S. Department of Labor has announced its Final Rule increasing the minimum salary level employees need to be paid in order to be deemed an exempt white collar employee, provided the employees otherwise meet the applicable duties and salary basis tests. The rule has been long-awaited since the predecessor Obama administration-era rule was enjoined by a Texas federal court in 2016. The appeal of that case has been on hold, allowing the Department time to consider a new rule that would more likely survive a legal challenge. It took nearly three years for this to happen, but the time has come. The new rule will go into effect on January 1, 2020. Read More ›

Sixth Circuit Provides Important Employer Guidance in Combating FMLA Abuse

The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals recently provided employers addressing potential FMLA abuse with important guidance on how such matters should be addressed. It turns out that playing golf while on an FMLA leave can actually get you fired. Read More ›

AB 5 Is Making Waves in California by Changing the Way Businesses Classify Workers

AB 5 is making waves in California by changing the way companies will classify workers. AB 5 codifies the ABC test adopted by the California Supreme Court in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court (2018) 4 Cal.4^th 903 (“Dynamex”). In Dynamex, the Court held that for violations of California’s wage orders, a worker is presumed to be an employee, unless the business proves the following: Read More ›

Chicago Adopts “Fair Work Week Ordinance”

Expansive Law Aimed at Predictive Scheduling for Workers, Limiting Employers’ Ability to Unilaterally Change Work Hours

On July 24, 2019, the City of Chicago enacted the “Fair Work Week Ordinance,” requiring that many businesses provide workers with up to two-weeks advance notice of their work hours and schedules. The FWW Ordinance becomes effective on July 1, 2020, and will require employers from a broad spectrum of industries to set most employee schedules at least 10 days in advance. Read More ›

Lawsuit Filed to Stop August 1 Effective Date of San Antonio Paid Sick Leave Ordinance

UPDATE III: Judge Agrees to Delay San Antonio Paid Sick Leave Ordinance

At a hearing this morning, Judge Sol Casseb entered the Agreed Order submitted by attorneys for the City and the businesses that filed suit regarding their agreement to delay the effective date of the PSL ordinance from August 1 to December 1. Entry of the Agreed Order eliminated the need for a hearing on the businesses’ request for an injunction prohibiting the ordinance from going into effect on August 1 and should, hopefully, allow sufficient time for the Texas Supreme Court to determine whether it will consider the enforceability of the City of Austin’s PSL ordinance, which case is currently pending before the Supreme Court. Read More ›

Justices Highlight Importance Of Title VII Procedural Details

On June 3, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court resolved the debate in employment discrimination law which had split the circuits. In a unanimous decision, the court held in Fort Bend County v. Davis that the exhaustion requirement that a plaintiff must first bring a Title VII discrimination charge to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission or the equivalent state fair employment practices agency is not a jurisdictional requirement, but rather a claims-processing rule that is mandatory but can be forfeited if the defense is not raised in a timely manner. Read More ›