Private Employee has no Right to Pursue Pattern or Practice Claim; Thus, no Entitlement to Class Action Procedural Mechanism

The Second Circuit Court of Appeals issued its ruling today in the matter of Parisi v. Goldman, Sachs & Co. et al., No. 11-5229-cv (2nd Cir., Mar. 21, 2013). More ›

Crowdsourced Workers: Are they Employees or Independent Contractors?

What happens when modern innovations in the workforce (made possible by the advent of the internet) collide with traditional concepts of employment?  You get lawsuits like Christopher Otey v. Crowdflower, Inc., filed late last year in the Northern District of California. More ›

Citing "Legal Uncertainty" Caused by Recess Appointments, House GOP Members Introduce Bill to Halt All NLRB Activity

On March 13, 2013, GOP members of the House Education and the Workforce Committee introduced a bill intended to put a halt to all actions by the National Labor Relations Board pending resolution of the confusion caused by a recent D.C. Circuit ruling that found President Obama's "recess appointment" of two of the three current NLRB members unconstitutional. Citing the "legal uncertainty" facing employers in the wake of the D.C. Circuit's decision in Noel Canning v. NLRB, the bill, titled the Preventing Greater Uncertainty in Labor-Management Relations Act (H.R. 1120), would restrict the Board's authority to take any action until one of three events occurs: the U.S. Supreme Court rules on the constitutionality of the President's "recess appointments", a Board quorum is constitutionally confirmed, or the terms of the two "recess appointments" expire. More ›

Employers may Violate Federal Law by Refusing to hire Union Organizers

Here’s a challenging scenario for employers: An individual applies for a job. The employer becomes aware that the applicant is a union volunteer who will likely try to organize the workplace if hired.

Can the employer refuse to hire the applicant without violating federal labor laws?

The answer depends on whether the applicant can demonstrate a “genuine interest in employment” apart from, or in addition to, his or her union activities. As demonstrated in a recent case, this may be an easy standard for union organizers to meet. More ›

Police Sergeant Engaged in Protected Activity when Complaining About Gender Inequality

Last month we reported to you the case of a public school principal whose First Amendment and retaliation claims were stricken by the Court due to the fact that she was not speaking as a private citizen, and thus, her speech was not protected. On the other side of the coin, here, the Third Circuit finds that a triable claim exists where a public employee articulates complaints of sex discrimination in the police force, because such speech implicates matters of public concern.  More ›

NLRB will ask Supreme Court to Affirm Board Members

The National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) announced today that it would ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review a federal court ruling that invalidated the appointment of three members and put hundreds of mostly pro-union board actions in jeopardy. More ›

Second Circuit Clarifies Burdens of Proof in Sarbanes-Oxley Whistleblower Cases

On March 5, 2013, the Second Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals issued its opinion in Bechtel v. Administrative Review Bd., U.S. Dept. of Labor and Competitive Technologies, Inc., Docket No. 11-4918-ag. More ›

Employees Entitled to Recover Unpaid Wages, Regardless of Immigration Status

Just because an employee does not report income to the IRS or used a fake Social Security card to get his job does not mean an employer can deprive the employee of overtime pay, says the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.  More ›

DOL Issues ObamaCare Self-Compliance Checklists for Employers

The Department of Labor has issued a “self-compliance tool,” (complete with a handy checklist) to help employers operating group health plans comply with the Affordable Care Act. More ›

Being on time to work may be Essential Function of Position

A city case manager had schizophrenia but was taking medication on a calibrated schedule. The employer had a flex-time policy which allowed employees to arrive at work anytime within a one hour window in the morning. If an employee was late, the supervisor had to approve or disprove the tardiness. The employee often could not get to work within that window of time due to his medication, and for roughly ten years, the employer excused such tardiness and allowed him to arrive later. Subsequently, however, the supervisor ceased approving the late arrivals. The employee repeatedly requested that he be permitted to arrive later so that he would not be disciplined for tardiness, but his supervisor would not allow it. His doctor recommended that his medication schedule not be altered at that time, which made it difficult for him to arrive earlier. The supervisor then recommended disciplinary action against the employee for his long history of tardiness, and at a grievance hearing, the City recommended his termination. The union representative argued that the employee’s mitigating circumstances (the disability) should be considered. The employee then made formal requests for accommodation to arrive at work later, and a higher-level supervisor denied the request without talking to the employee. He was then suspended for 30 days without pay as a sanction for his tardiness.  More ›