Employment

Alden Bianchi, Chair of Mintz Levin's Employee Benefits & Executive Compensation Practice, will provide a weekly installment on the complex reporting obligations outlined by the Affordable Care Act for health insurance carriers and employers. In this 24-week series, Alden will explain key requirements as he counts down to the January 2016 ACA reporting deadlines.

A panel appointed by New York Governor Andrew Cuomo recommended a minimum hourly wage increase to $15 for fast food service workers on Wednesday.

A New York federal court recently said that the plaintiff-employees involved in a wage and hour lawsuit are not required to produce their immigration documents and information.  The case is important because it limits an employer’s ability to defend against such claims based on their workers’ potential illegal immigration status.

In a sweeping decision, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission found that Title VII prohibits sexual orientation-based discrimination.

In my last article I promised to examine as part of my Corporate Divorce Series whether alimony (though the politically correct term these days is “spousal support”) is like unemployment (I’m pretty sure it is still acceptable to use that term).

Allen Smith at SHRM Online continues his coverage of the DOL's proposed overtime rules in this latest article, "Overtime Proposed Rule Will Result in 'Hard Choices' for Some Employers," which looks at the difficult choices employers are facing in deciding how best to cope with the expected new rules.

In a refreshing decision for employers, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals earlier this month tossed an eyebrow-raising NLRB decision which permitted AT&T customer-facing and publicly visible technicians to wear faux prison garb in customers’ homes and in public.

Alden Bianchi, Chair of the Employee Benefits & Executive Compensation Practice, will provide a weekly installment on the complex reporting obligations outlined by the Affordable Care Act for health insurance carriers and employers.

It turns out the answer to this question depends on the reason for the move and whether California law applies to the contract. We all know that California is finicky when it comes to non-competes – so much so that generally speaking, non-competes aren’t valid in California.

The DOL is at it again.  First it was the highly-anticipated release of the proposed overtime rules a few weeks ago, and now the Department’s Wage and Hour Division has issued an “Administrator’s Interpretation” – its first of the year – clarifying the Department’s views on the appropriate analysis for classifying workers as employees or independent contractors.

A recent Circuit Court case confirms that the term “non-inducement” means just that.

As a major national company learned recently, employers cannot shirk their obligations to investigate employee complaints of a hostile work environment simply because the identity of the harasser is unknown.  Failure to investigate all good faith complaints of harassment can result in serious liability for the employer under the anti-discrimination statutes.

One of the most disconcerting things about the DOL's proposed rule release was that it failed to provide any real clarity on its stance regarding the job duties test.  Rather than set forth concrete proposed changes for comment, the DOL asked a series of questions on whether it should in fact modify the job duties test, and if so, how.

The divorce metaphor bears fruit yet again when it comes to the employment relationship. To this mix I add the concept of “no fault” divorce and the reasons employment ends.

As ubiquitous as limited liability company interests may be these days, litigants are still arguing over whether the sale of LLC membership units is like the sale of stock.  When a stock sale takes place, the new owners of the stock simply fill the shoes of the old stockholders.

A Federal Appeals Court recently confirmed that under certain circumstances, parties may privately settle and release claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act.  A generic release contained in a settlement agreement won’t do it; instead, the parties must cite to a bona fide dispute regarding wages in the settlement agreement.

Employers are generally aware of the obligation under the Americans with Disabilities Act to engage in an “interactive process” with employees who require accommodations in order to perform their duties, but identifying the point at which this obligation is met is far from an exact science.

Reports in the popular media portrayed King v. Burwell as a case involving premium tax subsidies used to purchase health insurance from public exchanges or marketplaces under the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

On June 23rd, the Massachusetts Joint Committee on Labor and Workforce Development met to consider legislation relating to the legality and enforcement of non-compete agreements.

Who gets what in a break-up? I’ve addressed the employment break-up and the metaphorical marriage contract in my corporate divorce series, but what about the distribution of property when employment ends?