Littler Mendelson, P.C. • July 24, 2014
The Senate has voted overwhelmingly in favor of advancing a bill that would provide a tax incentive to employers that move their overseas jobs back to the United States, and eliminate a tax credit for moving operations outside the country. The chamber voted 93-7 to send the Bring Jobs Home Act (S. 2569) to the Senate floor for consideration.
Fisher & Phillips LLP • July 22, 2014
Cell phones ringing, texts buzzing, lunching on the run and channel surfing for your favorite radio station. Sounds like a typical day at the office, right?
Ogletree Deakins • July 22, 2014
In parts one and two of this series summarizing data protection law in the United Kingdom, we looked at the data protection principles to which employers must adhere in relation to obtaining, holding, or disposing of personal data, including sending it outside the European Union (EU).
Ogletree Deakins • July 15, 2014
Gallaudet University Chief Diversity Officer Angela McCaskill’s job was to promote a diverse and inclusive university community. Not only was she the institution’s first chief diversity officer, she was the first black, deaf woman to earn a Ph.D. from Gallaudet, which was founded to serve deaf and hard-of-hearing students. As Deputy to the President and Associate Provost for Diversity and Inclusion, McCaskill’s job included fostering and advancing a strategic and integrated approach to diversity priorities in all aspects of university life and establishing diversity priorities. As Chief Diversity Officer, she was responsible for enforcing guidelines for the university that ensured equity, inclusion, and social justice.
Ogletree Deakins • July 14, 2014
Who said bipartisanship is dead in Washington? It just requires the right legislation! Finally, a long-awaited jobs promotion bill was approved that aims to help train and prepare workers with the twenty-first century skills necessary for employment.
Littler Mendelson, P.C. • July 11, 2014
One of the few employment-related bills considered this term is on its way to the President’s desk. On July 9, the House overwhelmingly approved the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (H.R. 803) by a vote of 415-6 (with 11 not voting).
Constangy, Brooks & Smith, LLP • July 11, 2014
Oddities, weirdness, and the strange and unusual from the world of employment law.
Ogletree Deakins • July 09, 2014
The recent high-profile decision by the European Court of Justice involving Google has highlighted the existence of stringent data privacy laws in the European Union (EU). However, although the Google decision was groundbreaking insofar as it concerned a requirement that a search engine remove links to “irrelevant” or “outdated” information published by third parties (which could themselves continue to publish that information) it is only the application of the law that is new. The principles of relevance and accuracy themselves are fundamental principles of the Data Protection Directive 95/46/EC as implemented in the United Kingdom by the Data Protection Act 1998.
Constangy, Brooks & Smith, LLP • July 08, 2014
In all the hoopla over the Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby decision last week, it may have been lost that the Court refused to review a circuit court decision compelling arbitration in a collective action under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Littler Mendelson, P.C. • July 08, 2014
On July 1, 2014, the court granted class certification in a high-profile disparate impact discrimination case against the Census Bureau in federal court in New York based on its criminal record screening practices, Houser et al. v. Pritzker. The plaintiffs are represented by a well-known New York class action law firm and not by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The suit seeks back pay and equitable relief for a class of unsuccessful Latino and African-American job applicants. The Bureau allegedly discriminated against the class members by (1) requiring them to provide the Bureau with detailed information about their prior criminal records in order to progress in the hiring process (referred to as the 30-day Letter), and (2) rejecting job applicants on the basis of an allegedly arbitrary and inflexible assessment of their prior criminal records.