Employment

I just finished reading a very interesting opinion in Wang v. Phoenix Satellite Television US, Inc., which Judge Castel issued late last week out of the Southern District of New York and which addresses the scope of the New York City Human Rights Law – arguably the broadest anti-discrimination statute in the nation.

A recent trend in college athletics has been the display of “APU” wristbands by student-athletes during high-profile football games. All Players United or APU, represents itself as an organization concerned for the well-being of student-athletes.

In 2010, New York enacted the Wage Theft Prevention Act, which in part amended its Labor Law to require courts to impose a liquidated damages award of 100% of the total unpaid wages owed to the employee. The law previously capped the award at just 25%.

School is back in full swing and we thought it best to update our previous post addressing school-related leave requirements for employers. Many states require (or at least encourage) employers to provide short-term unpaid job-protected leave to their employees seeking to participate in their children’s school-related activities.

Beginning on January 1, 2015, the Fair Labor Standards Act will extend its minimum wage and overtime protections to nearly all home health care workers. This changes the playing field for an estimated two million workers who provide home care assistance to the elderly, disabled and infirm.

If Congress fails to pass an appropriations bill by midnight tonight, the government will partially shut down and private sector employers along with federal employees will be greatly impacted by reduced government services and furloughs. Here is a rundown of some employment-related issues associated with any shutdown.

Non-solicitation agreements now may have more teeth in Massachusetts. This week, in Corporate Technologies, Inc. v. Harnett, the First Circuit Court of Appeals allowed to stand an earlier injunction prohibiting Brian Harnett, a former employee of Corporate Technologies, from conducting business with Corporate Technologies’ customers.

On or before October 1, 2013, most employers are required to distribute a notice to their employees informing them about the new Health Care Reform Marketplace (also known as “the Exchanges”). Here are the highlights of this new requirement:

The nation’s broadest anti-discrimination law just got broader – now requiring employers to provide reasonable accommodations to pregnant employees. Existing Federal, state and city laws already protect women against pregnancy discrimination, but none went so far as to require reasonable accommodations.

The Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) recently published an article Michael Arnold wrote regarding the United States Department of Labor's development and use of mobile apps to help promote an Internet shaming strategy against non-compliant employers.

Established as part of the 2006 Massachusetts health care reform law, the Massachusetts Health Insurance Connector served as a model for the Affordable Care Act’s American Health Benefit Exchanges, also known as insurance marketplaces.

In a client advisory issued yesterday, we explain how the rules governing insurance marketplaces under the Affordable Care Act affect compliance with the Massachusetts free-rider surcharge.

A federal district court in Florida granted a preliminary injunction prohibiting five former employees of Mainline Information Systems from soliciting certain customers and using confidential information in violation of their employment agreements and prohibiting the employees’ new employer and its senior vice president for sales from assisting the employees

The Affordable Care Act has established a new annual fee, imposed on group health plans, which will be used to fund the Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute. The amount of the fee is $1 times the average number of individuals covered under the plan for the first year, then $2 times average covered individuals thereafter.

On January 4, we wrote that the Iowa Supreme Court ruled that a dentist acted legally when he fired a female employee because he had become irresistibly attracted to her – a situation the employer’s wife, also an employee, found objectionable. Earlier today the Court, which had taken the unusual step of granting a motion for reconsideration, upheld its decision.

As we wrote about previously, the legality of unpaid internships is a hot issue this summer, with courts struggling over two issues: (1) whether employers must classify entry-level “interns” as employees under the law, and therefore pay them at least minimum wage and overtime, and (2) whether the job conditions of groups of interns are similar enough so that class action

In a surprise announcement posted yesterday to the White’s House website, the Obama Administration announced a one-year delay (to January 1, 2105) in the enforcement of the employer shared responsibility rules enacted into law by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

As we reported in our post earlier today, the Obama administration has decided to delay implementation of the “employer shared responsibility” mandate for in order to afford employers more time to prepare for compliance.

The Equal Pay Act prohibits employers from paying a female employee less than a male employee for work that requires substantially equal skill, effort and responsibility, and that is performed under similar working conditions within the same establishment.

On June 11, in Glatt v. Fox Searchlight Pictures, Inc.., the US District Court for the Southern District of New York held that unpaid interns who worked for on the movie “Black Swan” had been improperly classified, and were entitled to pay for all hours work.