Employment

Susan Cohen, Chair of Mintz Levin’s Immigration Section, was recently quoted in the Bloomberg BNA Daily Labor Report article AILA Panel Weighs Pros, Cons to Employers Of Extra Government Scrutiny Under E-Verify.

The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit recently joined other courts in reining in the efforts of federal agencies to legislate by administrative action.

On May 30, 2012, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or the Board) Acting General Counsel issued a press release announcing publication of its report on social media, in which it examined seven cases involving policies governing the use of social media by employees. For information pertaining to the earlier two reports.

In 2011, the United States Supreme Court held in Thompson v. North American Stainless that an employer may violate Title VII by retaliating against an employee who is related to a worker engaged in conduct protected by Title VII—even if the employee himself neither raised a claim of discrimination nor engaged in any protected conduct.

Does an employer invade an employee’s privacy by accessing and reviewing the employee’s email? A recent Massachusetts Superior Court decision, Falmouth Firefighters Union v. Town of Falmouth, answers “no.”

My colleague, Tyrone P. Thomas, recently published an interesting article in a newsletter National Bar Association newsletter, the Labor and Employment Times.  As beneficial as these programs may be, both to the employee and the employer, a poorly designed and managed professional leave program can create preventable legal, tax, and financial issues.

My colleague, Don Schroeder, recently published an article in the Westlaw Journal of Employment.  In this article, Don examines recent National Labor Relations Board decisions and discusses  NLRB trends that may affect employers and employees.

According to a press release issued today, the EEOC has issued an updated Enforcement Guidance, relating to the use of arrest and conviction records in making employment decisions under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

On April 18, 55% of Citibank’s voting shareholders refused to approve the compensation plan for Citibank’s top five executives, including its Chief Executive Officer.

This case tests the limits of an employer’s attendance policy. Just how essential is showing up for work on a predictable basis? In the case of a neo-natal intensive care nurse, we conclude that attendance really is essential. 

There has been much written about the NLRB rule requiring employers- even those without unionized workforces- to a notice about union rights.  Click here, here, here, and here for earlier blog entries.  On April 17, 2012, the United States Court of Appeal for the D.C. Circuit barred enforcement of the rule, at least for now, while litigation is pending.

California employers, and employers with California employees, have been waiting for the California Supreme Court to decide Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior Court, regarding the scope of an employer’s duty to provide meal periods.

News outlets are all a-twitter about the practice of some employers to ask applicants for their Facebook login and password information, so they can have a “look around” as part of the interview process. Click here and here, for sample stories. The ACLU has weighed in, with the following statement:

“Caregiver responsibilities” is not a protected category under federal fair employment practice laws, meaning that it is not unlawful to discriminate against individuals with caregiving responsibilities.

The NLRB’s new notice-posting requirement is one step closer to reality as the United States District Court for the District of Columbia has, in National Ass'n of Manufacturers v. National Labor Relations Board, dismissed a claim by various business groups claiming that the NLRB had overstepped its rulemaking authority in requiring the notice.

We have written before about the EEOC’s position that inflexible leave of absence policies may violate the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Some people just can’t catch a break.  In recent years, this was certainly true of Michael Boitnott, an employee of Corning Incorporated.

On January 5, we posted a blog entry about the case of PhoneDog v. Kravitz, pending in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.  In short, during his employment with PhoneDog, Kravitz  used a PhoneDog twitter account (@PhoneDog_Noah) to disseminate information on behalf of the company and to promote its services.

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or the “Board”) released a report providing important guidance to employers on drafting social media policies that comply with its interpretation of labor laws. The report draws on several recent cases addressing employer policies limiting the use of social media by employees, and builds on a similar report issued last fall.

Retaliation claims are here to stay. According to charge statistics recently released by the EEOC, retaliation claims rose to an all-time high of 37,344 in fiscal year 2011, and were included in 37.4% of all charges filed with the agency.