Showing 29 posts from 2016.

{ Blog Post Photo }

This month marks 11 years since 2,500 workers at the Detroit Free Press and the Detroit News began a 19-month strike. Over the course of the strike, picketers blockaded printing plants, supervisors were cursed, carriers were robbed of their papers, cars were vandalized, delivery trucks were driven into crowds, tires were punctured by metal star nails, and police officers in riot gear used pepper spray and force to disperse crowds as strikers pelted them with auto parts and swatted at them with signs. Read More ›

{ Blog Post Photo }

Yesterday, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas issued a court order temporarily preventing the Department of Labor (DOL) from enforcing its new “Persuader Rule.” In his order, U.S. District Judge Sam Cummings ruled that “the new rule is defective to its core because it entirely eliminates the LMRDA’s advice exemption.” Accordingly, Judge Cummings issued a court order not only preventing the DOL from enforcing the new Persuader Rule in Texas, but anywhere in the nation. Read More ›

{ Blog Post Photo }

In the wake of what has been condemned as the worst terror attack on U.S. soil since 9/11, we should all be reminded of our duty to respond appropriately to suspicious behavior. Media outlets are now reporting that Omar Mateen worked as a security guard in Florida for British firm G4S since 2007. According to news reports, in the years prior to the attack in Orlando, at least one former co-worker had made complaints to management at G4S that Mateen used racial, ethnic and sexist slurs and talked about killing people. Although G4S is not responding to questions about Mateen’s conduct raised by the former co-worker, employers should take a moment to make sure they  have procedures in place for reporting and responding to complaints about employee behavior, whether through a non-harassment/discrimination policy or procedure or a non-violence policy or procedure. Read More ›

{ Blog Post Photo }

Earlier this year the U.S. Department of Labor filed a lawsuit against U.S. Steel Corporation, Inc. in federal court alleging that the company violated the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSH Act). So what did the company do to merit a federal lawsuit by a government agency? It required its employees to report work-related injuries immediately and disciplined two employees who did not. Specifically, the complaint alleges that the policy required “all employees to report immediately all injuries to a supervisor.” Most employers (if not all) would be shocked to learn that requiring compliance with such a commonplace policy may be considered unlawful.   Read More ›

{ Blog Post Photo }

The Department of Labor recently revised the Occupational Safety and Health Act regulations to increase scrutiny on employers by (1) publishing employers’ injury records on the internet, (2) providing greater anti-retaliation protections for employees who suffer work-related injuries or illnesses, and (3) imposing new requirements on employers’ for reporting work-related injuries or illnesses. The new regulations take effect on August 10, 2016 and will be phased in over the next three years. Read More ›

{ Blog Post Photo }

On Monday, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) finalized its wellness program regulations under both the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA). The regulations go into effect in January 2017, and apply to all workplace wellness programs, including those provided to employees outside of the employer’s health plan. The final regulations closely track the EEOC’s proposed rules and will generally allow employers to provide certain limited incentives in exchange for employees providing health information or undertaking medical examinations as part of a voluntary wellness program. Read More ›

{ Blog Post Photo }

This morning the U.S. Department of Labor issued new federal overtime regulations extending overtime pay eligibility to 4.2 million more employees across the country, including over 100,000 employees in Michigan. The White House claims that this expansion will increase wages by $12 billion dollars over the next 10 years.  Read More ›

{ Blog Post Photo }

On May 11, President Obama signed into law the Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA). The DTSA provides the first federal civil claim for misappropriation of trade secrets. Previously, employers had to rely on a patchwork of state laws to bring such claims. Now, employers will have access to the federal judiciary. Not only will this allow the federal court system to craft a more consistent body of law, it will make it easier for large companies to protect trade secrets across the nation. In addition, the DTSA provides a host of new remedies for employers to protect their trade secrets, as well as new protections for employees that employers must be aware of. Read More ›

{ Blog Post Photo }

April 14, 2016 marked one year since the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) enacted new rules truncating union representation proceedings. The NLRB celebrated this anniversary by releasing new data comparing representation case filings, processing and results under the first year of the new rules as compared with the same period one year prior. Read More ›

{ Blog Post Photo }

On April 25, 2016, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in a 2-1 decision that NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell’s four game suspension of New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady would stand. While the federal court’s decision is noteworthy for the impact it will have on the NFL (and its legions of fantasy league players) this fall, the decision also highlights an important aspect of arbitration that employers should be aware of – court deference to arbitral decisions and authority. Generally, courts will avoid vacating or modifying an arbitrator’s decision unless it falls under a few very narrow exceptions. Courts take the position that since the parties agreed to the arbitration process and to have an arbitrator decide their claims, the judicial system should not involve itself in that process unless absolutely necessary. The Brady case is an excellent example of this legal doctrine in practice. Read More ›

Follow Us

Facebook RSS LinkedIn Twitter Twitter
Get updates by email

Editors

Contributors

Archive