Employment Law Information Network
All Things Labor and Employment Law
Maine Greatly Expands Department of Labor’s Enforcement Powers Against Employers
Employers in Maine will soon face enhanced penalties for any violation of state employment laws under a recently enacted law granting the Pine Tree State’s Department of Labor broad enforcement powers.
tgelbman@littler.com Fri, 04/10/2026 – 15:26
Posted: | Ogletree Deakins Category: California - Cal/OSHA
On March 27, 2026, California’s Occupational Safety and Health Appeals Board retracted a worker-friendly decision issued earlier in March because it failed to consider the employer’s answer to the Division of Occupational Safety and Health’s (Cal/OSHA) petition for reconsideration due to a clerical error.
Posted: | Jackson Lewis Category: Washington State - General
TakeawaysWashington will effectively ban all employment non-compete agreements as of 06.30.27, with only limited exceptions, and regardless of when they were signed. Employers must provide notices to current and former employees by 10.01.27 that covered non-competition covenants are void and unenforceable. Confidentiality, certain non-solicitation and limited education-repayment provisions remain permitted if they are narrowly drafted.Related linkHouse Bill 1155ArticleWashington State expanded its restrictions on non-competition agreements to effectively ban all non-compete agreements and covenants in employment. The changes go into effect June 30, 2027.
Posted: | Jackson Lewis Category: Connecticut - General
TakeawaysConnecticut lawmakers are advancing bills on workplace practices that could affect employers’ operations and compliance.One proposal would impose strict requirements on employers’ use of automated decision systems, including bias audits, disclosures, and opt‑out rights for applicants.Another bill targets predictive scheduling, requiring advance notice of work schedules, premium pay for changes, and limits on employee hours.Related linkConnecticut General AssemblyArticleThe Connecticut legislature’s current session is scheduled to adjourn May 6, 2026. Several labor and employment bills under consideration could affect employers’ operations and compliance obligations.
Posted: | Littler Category: California - Wage & Hour
What do employers need to know about independent contractors and California EDD payroll tax audits?
What do employers need to know about independent contractors and California EDD payroll tax audits?
ehubert@littler.com Tue, 04/07/2026 – 16:08
Posted: | Jackson Lewis Category: California - Wage & Hour
Many cities across California have adopted higher minimum wage and benefit requirements for hotel employers. The City of Los Angeles raised its wages for hotel and airport workers last year in advance of the Olympics. Many of these local ordinances increase in July. As such, hotel employers should verify they are ready for the requirements… Continue Reading
Posted: | Shaw Law Group, PC Category: California - General
Bereavement leave feels human—but California law makes it highly technical. In this episode, Jen walks through what’s actually required, where employers…
Virginia Advances Heat Illness Legislation While Other States Are Poised to Follow Suit
Heat illness prevention continues to be a key focus for state regulators as they move to fill the void left by OSHA’s still-uncompleted proposed heat standard. Most recently, the Virginia legislature approved heat illness prevention legislation,1 and
Posted: | Ogletree Deakins Category: California - General
In the first part of this two-part podcast series, Karen Tynan (shareholder, Sacramento) and Robert Rodriguez (shareholder, Sacramento), who are co-chairs of Ogletree’s Workplace Violence Prevention Practice Group, review the first year of Cal/OSHA enforcement of California’s SB 553 workplace violence prevention law. Karen, who is also chair of the
Posted: | Littler Category: Oregon - Wage & Hour
Oregon Court Clarifies That Asking for a Raise Is Protected by Wage Transparency Law
In a clarification of Oregon’s wage transparency statute, the Oregon Court of Appeals has held that ORS 659A.355 protects an employee from retaliation for merely asking for a raise, even where no claim of pay inequity
Posted: | Ogletree Deakins Category: Illinois - Wage & Hour
A recent ruling by the Supreme Court of Illinois that the state’s minimum wage law does not incorporate the federal Portal-to-Portal Act’s (PPA) exclusion for “preliminary or postliminary” employee activities could open the door to a wave of new wage-and-hour lawsuits by employees over time spent undergoing health or security
Posted: | Ogletree Deakins Category: California - Fair Employment And Housing Act
Legislation recently introduced in the California State Assembly would impose new restrictions on when and how employers with five or more employees may inquire about, obtain, and use applicant conviction history, while strengthening procedural protections.
Posted: | Shaw Law Group, PC Category: California - Whistleblowers
California employers often focus on whether an employee’s complaint has legal merit. That instinct makes sense. If the complaint is wrong, exaggerated, or based on a misunderstanding of the law, it is easy to assume
Posted: | Ogletree Deakins Category: Massachusetts - Wage & Hour
In a ruling that provides important early guidance on the reach of the Massachusetts Paid Family and Medical Leave Act (PFMLA), a Suffolk Superior Court judge in the Business Litigation Session has held that the PFMLA’s anti-retaliation protections apply only to “employers” and do not extend to individual employees of
Posted: | Jackson Lewis Category: Illinois - General
TakeawaysThe Seventh Circuit held that the 2024 amendment to BIPA’s damages provision applies retroactively, eliminating the possibility of “per‑scan” statutory damages for cases pending at the time of enactment.The court reasoned that the amendment affects remedies, making it a procedural change that applies to existing cases under Illinois retroactivity principles.The decision significantly limits defendants’ potential exposure in pending BIPA cases and may require courts to reassess federal subject‑matter jurisdiction.Related linkClay v. Union Pacific Railroad Co.Article
We use cookies to improve your experience on our site. By using our site, you consent to cookies.
Manage your cookie preferences below:
Essential cookies enable basic functions and are necessary for the proper function of the website.
Statistics cookies collect information anonymously. This information helps us understand how visitors use our website.
Google Analytics is a powerful tool that tracks and analyzes website traffic for informed marketing decisions.
Service URL: policies.google.com (opens in a new window)
You can find more information in our Cookie Policy and Privacy Policy.