The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has created a buzz within the franchise community by announcing that McDonald’s may be responsible as a “joint employer” for alleged unfair labor practices of some of its franchisees. Employees of franchisees have filed more than 180 unfair labor practice charges against both the franchisees and McDonald’s. The NLRB’s general counsel has said that 43 of these cases have merit. He has authorized the filing of complaints naming McDonald’s as a respondent in those cases unless settlements are reached.
On April 29, 2014, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals held that employers can be liable for third-party harassment under a negligence standard. In doing so, the court joined other circuits in establishing that employers can be liable under Title VII for third parties that create a hostile work environment, provided the employer knew or should have known of the harassment and failed to take prompt remedial action to end it.
During his February 2014 State of the Union address, President Obama pledged to rely on his own executive authority to take action on behalf of American workers. He has taken this commitment to heart, and over the past several months has flexed his presidential muscle through executive orders and presidential memoranda. Specifically, Obama has increased the minimum wage payable by federal contractors, directed the Department of Labor to loosen overtime pay requirements, and prohibited retaliation against federal contractor employees who discuss their compensation.
Do you sponsor a tax-qualified retirement plan that was pre-approved by the IRS? If so, pre-approved documents take one of two forms.
David Dubberly was recently featured in Midlandsbiz for his article on Supreme Court Expands Sarbanes-Oxley Whistleblower Protection to Employees of Private Companies.
The Internal Revenue Service recently published final regulations under Section 83 of the tax code.
Employers often use waivers and releases of claims in agreements with former employees, either as part of a separation agreement at the time employment ends or in a settlement agreement after a former employee has raised claims against the employer. Both of these types of agreements have garnered attention lately, serving as a reminder of some best practice approaches in each context.
This week, the U.S. Supreme Court confirmed that severance pay is subject to FICA tax.
As physicians search for new revenue streams in response to declining reimbursement and additional administrative complexity, a new law passed in 2013 should provide added flexibility and time to expand practices through the use of physician assistants. The health care markets continue to realign as the Affordable Care Act is implemented and if all goes as planned, there will be more patients.
Many employers require that applicants pass a pre-employment medical exam to ensure they are physically capable of doing the job. Employers should be aware that pre-employment medical exams, while not categorically barred, could violate several federal statutes and draw unwanted attention from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or the Commission).
Congress passed the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) in 1925 to place arbitration agreements on the same footing as other contracts.1 Under the FAA, an arbitration provision “shall be valid, irrevocable, and enforceable, save upon such grounds as exist at law or in equity for the revocation of any contract.” 9 U.S.C.A. § 2. This simple idea has, of course, spawned considerable controversy and litigation, and the tension between the FAA and State laws continues to appear on many fronts.
On February 7, 2014, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) sued CVS Pharmacy Inc. in federal court in Chicago to invalidate the company’s standard severance agreement. The lawsuit raises concerns because it attacks language that employers commonly use in severance agreements.
Congress passed the Americans with Disabilities Amendments Act of 2008 (ADAAA) over five years ago on Sept.17, 2008. The act’s stated purpose was to reinstate “a broad scope of protection to be available under the ADA” as the result of several decisions from the U.S. Supreme Court that had created an “inappropriately high level of limitation necessary to obtain coverage under the ADA.”
You may have heard of them, but may not fully appreciate or understand how an Employee Stock Ownership Plan or “ESOP” could help you meet your business planning goals.
It’s the time of the season when many make well-intended resolutions for the New Year. Promises usually include ending bad habits and starting good ones. With resolutions in mind, what could human resource professionals focus on in 2014? In light of the current legislative and regulatory forecast, here are some possibilities (listed in no particular order) for consideration: