join our network! affiliate login  
Custom Search
Daily and Weekly Editions • Articles • Alerts • Expert Advice • Learn More

DOL Opines That Parent’s Attendance at IEP Conference Warrants FMLA Leave

Jackson Lewis P.C. • August 20, 2019
In an August 8, 2019 opinion letter, the U.S. Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division (WHD) shed some light on what counts as “caring for” a family member under the FMLA. In Opinion Letter FMLA2019-2-A, the WHD found that a parent was entitled to take intermittent FMLA leave to attend a meeting at her child’s school to discuss the child’s Individualized Education Program (“IEP”). Such meetings were held four times per year and were attended by a number of professionals, including a speech pathologist, school psychologist, other therapists, teachers and school administrators. The parent had been told by her employer that attendance at these meetings was not covered by the FMLA.

Union’s Goal: 100,000 New Members by 2024

Jackson Lewis P.C. • August 20, 2019
UNITE HERE hopes to increase its membership by one-third, to 400,000 members, by 2024, according to Bloomberg Law.

"EEO-1 Component 2 Pay Data Report: Time Is Running Out, but the Sky Is Still Not Falling"

Jones Walker • August 20, 2019
Now that the EEO-1 Component 2 pay data report portal has been open for a month, and with a mere six weeks until the deadline to file your 2017 and 2018 compensation data, it’s time for an update to our June alert on the same topic. You also might want to tune in to our podcast discussion “What Happens If You Don’t File Your EEO-1 Component 2 Compensation Data?,” which ran on a recent episode of HR Works

Employers May Demand Arbitration Agreements in Response to Collective Actions, NLRB Rules

XpertHR • August 20, 2019
A new decision from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) brings welcome news to employers regarding mandatory arbitration agreements.

OSHA Warns Fines Must Be Paid Or You (Individually) May Face “18 And Life”

Fisher Phillips • August 20, 2019
Ever wonder what the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) would do if an employer refused to pay a fine? We just found out, and it’s not just the employer that needs to be concerned. After a New Jersey-based construction company failed for four years to pay $412,000 in penalties that the OSHA assessed against it, the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals recently found the President – and only board member – of the company in contempt and therefore liable to pay the company’s penalty.

Supreme Court’s Epic Systems Decision on Arbitration Interpreted Broadly by Labor Board

Jackson Lewis P.C. • August 20, 2019
An employer may lawfully issue to its employees a new or revised mandatory arbitration agreement containing a class- and collective-action waiver specifying that employment disputes are to be resolved by individualized arbitration, even if it was in response to employees opting into a collective action (such as a wage lawsuit), the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has ruled. Cordúa Restaurants, Inc., 368 NLRB No. 43 (Aug. 14, 2019). The NLRB also concluded that the NLRA does not prohibit an employer from threatening to discharge an employee who refuses to sign such an agreement.

Is Morbid Obesity a Protected Disability? Ninth Circuit Weighs In But Doesn’t Answer the Question

Carothers DiSante & Freudenberger LLP • August 20, 2019
Today’s post highlights one of many examples of cases employers should never have to spend tens of thousands of dollars litigating. In this case, Valtierra v. Medtronic, the plaintiff worked for Medtronic for 10 years and apparently was obese throughout his employment. Plaintiff, whose job was to maintain and repair Medtronic’s manufacturing equipment, admittedly falsified computer records to indicate that he had completed repair assignments when, in fact, he had not done the work. Medtronic fired him (duh). Unable to accept personal responsibility for his own misconduct, Plaintiff sued Medtronic, alleging that he was fired because of his purported disability – morbid obesity.

California’s New Hairstyle Antidiscrimination Law May Signal the Beginning of a National Trend

Jackson Lewis P.C. • August 20, 2019
Signaling a growing movement to align culturally inclusive practices with legal protections, California has become the first state to expressly ban discrimination based on hairstyle and hair texture associated with a person’s race. On July 3, 2019, Governor Gavin Newsome signed into law Senate Bill No. 188, the Create a Respectful and Open Workplace for Natural Hair Act (CROWN Act).
Our Members
Become A Member