The District of Columbia recently amended the D.C. Human Rights Act (DCHRA) by adding a new protective status, broadening who is covered under the act. The District also modified the DCRHA to redefine how plaintiffs may prove harassment claims within the District. The new law, which took effect on October
Articles Discussing General Topics In D.C. Labor & Employment Law.
The District of Columbia Council has postponed the first effective date of voter Initiative 82, the “Tip Credit Elimination Act,” from January 1, 2023, to May 1, 2023.
DC Circuit struck down the portions of the NLRB’s representation election rule addressing the timeline for submitting employee voter lists and for certifying election results, and election observer eligibility. Court upheld parts of the rule governing pre-election litigation of certain voter eligibility issues, and the timeframe for scheduling
D.C. Noncompete Ban, Years in the Making: On January 25, 2021, FordHarrison published a Legal Alert indicating that Washington, D.C. would soon implement a ban on noncompete agreements. As noted, the Ban on Non-Compete Agreements Amendment Act of 2020 was considered one of the most far-reaching prohibitions on noncompete agreements in the country. However, feedback from the business community prompted the D.C. Council to revisit the Act, delaying its implementation. Finally, the D.C. Non-Compete Clarification Amendment Act of 2022 (the “Amendment”) went into effect on October 1, 2022. This newly amended version, while less far-reaching, is still a significant ban on the use of noncompete agreements and includes important changes that every D.C. employer should know.
Beginning as early as January 15, 2023, certain employers will need to ensure they are complying with the District of Columbia’s Transportation Benefits Equity Amendment Act of 2020, also known as the “Parking Cash Out Law.”
In 2018, the District of Columbia enacted the Tipped Wage Workers Fairness Amendment Act (“the Act”). Among other things, the Act imposes obligations on employers that employ tipped employees, including significant training and reporting requirements.
The District of Columbia prompted widespread outcry from the business community when it enacted one of the broadest bans on non-compete agreements in the country in early 2021. At least in part spurred by that outcry, this past summer the D.C.
In response to widespread criticism of the Ban on Non-Compete Agreements Amendment Act of 2020, which sought to impose a near-total ban on non-competes, the Council of the District of Columbia has amended the law and postponed its enforcement date. The revised ban, named the Non-Compete Clarification Amendment Act
In 2018, the District of Columbia enacted the Tipped Wage Workers Fairness Amendment Act (TWWF), preserving the use of the tip credit in the District, but imposing significant obligations on employers that employ tipped employees, such as mandatory sexual harassment prevention training and notice requirements. Certain aspects of the TWWF
After more than two years of delay and amendment, the District of Columbia’s Ban on Non-Compete Agreements Amendment Act of 2020, which was introduced in the pre-pandemic days of 2020, will finally take legal effect on October 1, 2022. Efforts to amend the 2020 act culminated in the Non-Compete Clarification
The District of Columbia City Council has finalized amendments to implement the D.C. Ban on Non-Compete Agreements Amendment Act of 2020 effective October 1, 2022, and Mayor Muriel Bowser has signed D.C. Bill 24-256.
Having initially enacted a total ban on non-compete agreements that went so far as to ban prohibitions against moonlighting with competitors, the District of Columbia City Council has significantly changed the law’s scope. Details of the amended D.C. “ban,” including how the act permits non-compete agreements for “highly compensated employees,”
On Friday, July 8, 2022, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued its decision in United Mine Workers of America 1974 Pension Plan v. Energy West Mining Company, joining the Sixth Circuit in holding that the assumptions used by a multiemployer defined benefit pension plan in
Executive Summary: On June 3, 2022, an en banc panel (meaning all of the judges on the court participated) of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued a landmark decision holding that Title VII does not require employees to demonstrate an “objectively tangible harm.” Chambers v. District of Columbia (D.C. Cir. 2022) (en banc).
Both Maryland and Virginia have joined the District of Columbia in enacting laws relating to paid family and medical leave for private-sector workers.