Friday, February 29, 2008
Week In Review (February 29, 2008)
Most Popular Federal Law Article
[url=“http://www.elinfonet.com/headcount.php?ID=12697”>Supreme Court Holds that FAA Overrides Conflicting State Law Jurisdictional Provision.</A>
Citing the national policy favoring arbitration established in the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) and Southland Corp. v. Keating, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the contractual agreement to arbitrate disputes preempts contrary state law frameworks. Writing for the Court in Preston v. Ferrer, decided on February 20, 2008, Justice Ginsberg held that the FAA overrides state laws that would lodge primary jurisdiction in another forum beside arbitration, regardless of whether that forum is judicial or administrative.
Located On: Ford & Harrison LLP
Most Popular State Law Article
<a >Employers May Fire Employees for Marijuana Use Despite California’s Compassionate Use Act.</A>
A recent ruling by the California Supreme Court in Ross v. RagingWire Telecommunications, Inc. makes clear that California’s Compassionate Use Act of 1996, a passed voter initiative which provides a person using marijuana for medicinal purposes with a defense to certain state criminal charges, does not prohibit an employer from firing an employee for marijuana use.
Located On: Cooley Godward Kronish LLP.
Most Popular Headlines
<a TARGET=“_blank”]Dealing with workplace conflict[/url]
CNet News Blog - February 25, 2008
Friday, February 22, 2008
Week In Review (February 22, 2008)
Most Popular Federal Law Article
[url=“http://www.elinfonet.com/headcount.php?ID=12622”>Expansion of FMLA Leave for Families of Service Members.</A>
President Bush has signed the first amendment of the FMLA since Congress passed the original law in 1993. As initially drafted, the FMLA requires employers of more than 50 employees to approve unpaid leave for employees. The terms of FMLA leave include up to 12 weeks of time off for eligible employees to care for themselves or a family member’s serious health condition.
Located On: Shaw Valenza LLP
Most Popular State Law Article
<a >California Court of Appeal Expands the Administrative Exemption Under the New Wage Orders.</A>
In a victory for California employers, a California Court of Appeal recently rejected the traditional administrative/production dichotomy test for an administrative exempt employee for certain business models. In Combs v. Skyriver Communications, Inc. (2/7/08), the Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s decision dismissing the employee’s claims for overtime, unpaid meal period penalties and unpaid rest period penalties because the employee was properly classified as an administrative exempt employee. Importantly, the Court of Appeal relied heavily upon the recent changes to the Industrial Welfare Commission’s Wage Order No. 4-2001 in determining that the employee was an administrative exempt employee and, therefore, not entitled to overtime, meal periods or rest periods.
Located On: Ford & Harrison LLP
Most Popular Headlines
<a TARGET=“_blank”]The big discrimination case before the Supreme Court.[/url]
Slate - February 18, 2008
Friday, February 15, 2008
Week In Review (February 15, 2008)
Most Popular Federal Law Article
[url=“http://www.elinfonet.com/headcount.php?ID=12562”>Appeals Court Says Company Policy Restricting Overtime Does Not Trump Compensation Obligations.</A>
A federal appeals court in New York has ruled that the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) requires employers to pay one-and-a-half times the regular rate of pay as compensation to employees who perform overtime work even though the work was not authorized and was in violation of company policy. The case, Chao v. Gotham Registry, Inc., No. 06-2432-cv (2d Cir. Jan. 24, 2008), dates back to 1992 when the Secretary of Labor sued Gotham Registry, Inc. (“Gotham”), a staffing agency, for not paying overtime wages to the nurses it employed.
Located On: Jackson Lewis LLP
Most Popular State Law Article
<a >California Employers Not Required To Accommodate Medical Marijuana Users.</A>
The California Supreme Court recently rejected a lawsuit brought by an employee who was terminated shortly after his employer learned that he had tested positive for marijuana. According to the court, employers have the right to conduct preemployment drug tests and to fire, or refuse to hire, individuals who test positive for illegal drugs – even if they are used for medicinal purposes. Ross v. RagingWire Telecommunications, Inc., No. S138130, California Supreme Court (January 24, 2008).
Located On: Ogletree Deakins
Most Popular Headlines
<a TARGET=“_blank”]Handling tricky questions in a job interview[/url]
Baltimore Sun - February 11, 2008
Page 1 of 1 pages
Federal Article Feeds