Where previous protections offered by the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Labor Standards Act, and the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978 fell short, employees were left to make hard choices between quitting their jobs or working in a position that did not fully accommodate their medical needs while pregnant or after giving birth.  Although some state laws fill those needs, many states do not provide any protection. During 2022, two important protections were signed into law by President Joe Biden: the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, and the Providing Urgent Maternal Protections for Nursing Mothers Act. The new protections put in place by these acts ensure that pregnant employees will not suffer because of their pregnancy, but instead be provided the proper and necessary time off and accommodations after giving birth.

Continue Reading New Federal Protections for Pregnant Workers

Dykema attorneys Robert Boonin and Sean Darke will be presenting the above entitled webinar for the Michigan Chamber of Commerce on January 18, 2023. They will address how the legal landscape for employers has changed since the pandemic, the 2020 election, and 2022 mid-term elections, which may surprise many employers and which may require major changes to their approaches to employment relations. The webinar, which will have interactive Q&A, will highlight the biggest developments and provide participants guidance on how to reduce their liability going forward, and to otherwise avoid unwittingly stepping on a legal land mines triggering significant liability.

Continue Reading What Employers Need to Know Now! The Top Legal Changes and Issues for 2023!

On October 20, 2022, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) unveiled a new version of the “Know Your Rights: Workplace Discrimination is Illegal” poster which updates and replaces the previous “EEO is the Law” poster. This poster also supersedes an October 19, 2022, version of the “Know Your Rights” poster.

Covered employers are required to

The U.S. Department of Labor on Tuesday unveiled a six-step “economic realities” test that looks to narrow the ability of employers to classify workers as independent contractors. The changes have broad implications as to whether, under federal law; workers are entitled to minimum wage and overtime pay; employers must comply with recordkeeping requirements for such employees; and payroll taxes such as FICA, workers’ compensation, and unemployment must be paid with respect to these workers. The misclassification of workers as independent contractors also can have dire consequences for employers based on the potential assessment of liquidated (double) damages and attorney’s fees under the Fair Labor Standards Act, particularly where such claims are brought as collective actions. The Department suggests that 10-30% of employers in the private sector are, per the proposed rule, misclassifying employees as contractors.
Continue Reading Employees in Disguise: Proposed Rule Would Roll Back Trump-era Independent Contractor Rule

The U.S. Supreme Court’s opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, No. 19-1392 (June 24, 2022), overruling Roe v. Wade, raised more questions than answers for U.S. employers. As a result of Dobbs, abortion is no longer a constitutionally protected right in the United States. As such, each state is left to determine how to legislate with regard to abortion.
Continue Reading Employers Face Uncertainty After SCOTUS Abortion Rights Decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization

On Thursday, July 28, 2022, the Michigan Supreme Court issued its opinion in Rouch World, LLC v. Department of Civil Rights, finding in a 5-2 decision that Michigan’s Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act (“ELCRA”) protects against discrimination based on gender identity and sexual orientation. While so holding, the Court overturned precedent set nearly 30 years ago by the Michigan Court of Appeals in Barbour v. Department of Social Services. That court had relied upon then analogous federal precedent in holding that the same statute did not extend protection on the basis of sexual orientation, as “sex” in the context of ELCRA meant only “gender discrimination, not discrimination based on sexual orientation.”
Continue Reading Michigan Supreme Court Recognizes Protection Under State Law Against Discrimination Based on Gender Identity and Sexual Orientation

As infections during the worldwide COVID pandemic have waxed and waned, and as vaccinations and new treatments for COVID infection have been introduced, employers have begun to see a substantial increase in the number of employees that have returned to work. That, in turn, has caused many employers to re-evaluate their COVID testing protocols to determine who may return to the office and when.
Continue Reading EEOC Limits Permissible Workplace COVID Testing In Its Most Recent Guidance

Chicago has adopted a first-of-its-kind ordinance that requires employers doing business in the City to provide separate “bystander” sexual harassment training to their employees. The ordinance seeks to combat workplace misconduct in Chicago and may serve as a model for other municipalities seeking to expand worker protections.
Continue Reading See No Evil, Hear No Evil: Chicago Ordinance Requires New Sexual Harassment and Bystander Training

On Wednesday, June 15, 2022, the United States Supreme Court issued an opinion that severely limits California’s right to enlist employees as private attorneys general to enforce California labor law by allowing employers to use mandatory arbitration provisions to defeat such representative claims.
Continue Reading In a Big Win for California Employers, SCOTUS Limits the Reach of the Golden State’s Private Attorneys General Act of 2004

On June 9, 2022, the Austin City Council unanimously voted to pass what is known as a CROWN Act, a law prohibiting discrimination based on a person’s hair texture or hairstyle. CROWN stands for “Creating a Respectful and Open World for Natural Hair.” Consequently, the Austin City Code will be revised to prohibit discrimination based on protective hairstyle in housing, public accommodations, and employment. Protective hairstyles are those necessitated by, or resulting from, the characteristics of a hair texture or hairstyle commonly associated with race, national origin, ethnicity, or culture, and include but are not limited to afros, Bantu knots, braids, cornrows, curls, locs, twists, or hair that is tightly coiled or tightly curled.
Continue Reading Austin City Council Passes First CROWN Act Applicable to Private Employers in Texas