|
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
State Employment Law Articles
Article Index » michigan: 10 Most Recent Articles Report Link Change in Minimum Wage Rate Jeopardizes the Exempt Status of Thousands of Michigan Employees.Littler Mendelson, P.C. - May 24, 2006 New legislation increasing Michigan's minimum wage rate could result in hundreds of thousands of employees suddenly becoming eligible for overtime pay. The increase in Michigan's minimum wage occurred through the passage of Senate Bill 318, enacted as Michigan Compiled Laws section 408.384. The bill increases the state's minimum wage rate to $6.95 per hour effective October 1, 2006, $7.15 per hour effective July 1, 2007, and $7.40 per hour effective July 1, 2008. Report Link Michigan Increases Minimum Wage Effective October 1, 2006.Jackson Lewis LLP - April 03, 2006 On March 28, 2006 Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm signed legislation increasing the state's minimum wage – currently $5.15 – to $7.40 in three increments. The first hike, effective October 1, 2006, will raise the minimum wage to $6.95. On July 1, 2007, the minimum wage will be increased to $7.15, and raised again to $7.40 on July 1, 2008. Report Link Deadline To Protect Confidentiality Of SSN Numbers Is Fast Approaching (pdf).Ogletree Deakins - December 06, 2005 This is a reminder that companies with operations or substantial business in the
State of Michigan must implement a policy to protect the confidentiality of Social Security
numbers (SSN) by January 1, 2006. Report Link Michigan Establishes Minimum Privacy Protections For Social Security Numbers.Jackson Lewis LLP - November 01, 2005 In 2005, Michigan joined a growing number of states (Arkansas, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida and Georgia, among others) that have enacted specific legislation protecting individual Social Security numbers. The Social Security Number Privacy Act prohibits the intentional disclosure of more than four sequential digits of an employee's SSN. The Act makes it a misdemeanor – punishable by up to 93 days in prison and a fine of $1000 – to knowingly violate any provision. Aggrieved employees may also bring a civil suit to recover their actual damages or $1,000 (whichever is greater) plus attorneys' fees. Many of the Act's provisions became effective immediately upon passage on March 1, 2005. Other provisions will become effective on January 1, 2006 Report Link Michigan Supreme Court Closes the "Continuing Violation" Loophole for Discrimination Claims.Jackson Lewis LLP - August 12, 2005 In a clear victory for employers, the Michigan Supreme Court has rejected a long-standing theory of liability that, until now, individuals have used to resurrect stale discrimination claims that fell outside of state law limits on when lawsuits could be filed. In a split opinion, the court ruled that untimely claims of discrimination would no longer be permitted under the theory of a "continuing violation" of the state Civil Rights Act, which has a three-year statute of limitations. Report Link Michigan Becomes the First State in the Nation to Open the Door to Potential Employer Liability for Workplace Identify Theft.Littler Mendelson, P.C. - April 13, 2005 In early 2005, Michigan became the first state in the nation to enact legislation requiring that every employer maintain a policy for safeguarding employee social security numbers. During the same time frame, the Michigan Court of Appeals became the first appellate court to allow the victims of identity theft to recover damages (totaling $275,000) from an organization that failed to adequately safeguard personal information that was subsequently used for identity theft. These national precedents expose Michigan employers to liability for failing to safeguard employee personal information, and open the door to employer liability for workplace identity theft in other jurisdictions that likely will follow Michigan’s example. Report Link Am I on the Hook? Individual Liability for Supervisors in Michigan.Jackson Lewis LLP - March 18, 2005 Are supervisors liable, in their individual capacity, for violation of an employee's civil rights? Unfortunately for employers and supervisors, there is no clear answer at present. Report Link Michigan Supreme Court Levels the Field for "Reverse Discrimination" Claims.Jackson Lewis LLP - September 10, 2004 Reversing a position held since 1997, the Michigan Supreme Court has ruled that the "background circumstances" test for determining the sufficiency of a claim of reverse employment discrimination does not comport with the state's fair employment practices law.
|
Count and Sub-TopicsArticles Found: 8NO SUBTOPICSEmployment Law Seminars
WORKPLACE VIOLENCE: STRATEGIES FOR PREVENTION
Sacramento
July 8, 2008 Shaw Valenza LLPBenefits "Q And A": Get The Benefit From Our Benefits ExpertsEast Elmhurst
2008-7-8 Queens Chamber of CommercePREVENTING HARASSMENT AND OTHER EEO ISSUES AT WORK: IT’S ALL ABOUT RESPECT (AB1825 COMPLIANCE)Eureka
July 10, 2008 Shaw ValenzaThe Connecticut Sexual and Other Harassment Education and Training in the Workplace ActNew London
2008-7-16 Jackson Lewis LLPThe Connecticut Sexual and Other Harassment Education and Training in the Workplace ActHartford
2008-7-16 Jackson Lewis LLPFree Lunchtime Webinar: Protecting Company Assets: Trade Secrets, Non-Competition, And The World Of Restrictive Covenants: Will The Courts Really Enforce These Agreements?Online
July 17, 2008 Fisher & PhillipsDealing With HR Dilemmas In The Digital AgeMelville
2008-7-17 Jackson Lewis LLPDealing With HR Dilemmas In The Digital AgeIrving
2008-7-17 Jackson Lewis LLPComplimentary Breakfast Briefing for In-House Counsel, Senior Management and HR ProfessionalsMemphis
July 22, 2008 Ford & HarrisonInternal Influences /Protecting Your Workplace From Distraction And Destruction - Part IIRiverhead
2008-7-24 Jackson Lewis LLP |
|
| ||
|
Terms of Use
|
Privacy
|
Advertising
|
About
|
Contact
|
For Law Firms
|
Partners
Copyright © 2006 elinfonet.com, llc.
All Rights Reserved.
The use of this site, and the terms and conditions for our providing information, is governed by our Terms of Use, including the disclaimers contained therein. By using this site, you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Use and that you accept and will be bound by the terms thereof.
This site is designed for lawyers concentrating in employment law and human resource professionals who specialize in employee relations. As more fully set forth in the terms of use, the information provided on or through this site is for general information purposes; it is not a determination of your legal rights, nor your responsibilities under the law. None of the information contained on this site is, or should be construed as, legal advice. The information should not be relied upon for legal advice. We are not engaged in the practice of law and no attorney-client relationship is being created. Any information communicated to any lawyer via this site does not have the confidentiality protection of the attorney/client privilege. If you are seeking legal advice, find a qualified lawyer in your area. If you need help finding a lawyer, call your local, county or state bar association. All logos and trademarks on this site are property of their respective owners. | ||
Federal Article Feeds