Articles Discussing General Topics In Missouri Labor & Employment Law.

Governor Eric Greitens campaigned on promises to sign “right-to-work” law if given the opportunity and the Missouri House of Representatives gave him that opportunity by passing Senate Bill 19 (SB 19) after hours of floor debates on February 2, 2017. Governor Greitens signed SB 19 on February 6, 2017, and the new law becomes effective on August 28, 2017.

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, in Durrell v. Tech Electronics, Inc., 4:16-CV-01367 (E.D. Mo. Nov. 15, 2016), held that an at-will employee’s non-compete agreement may not be enforceable where the only form of consideration is the employee’s at-will employment status since an at-will employment relationship cannot constitute consideration.

In a case of first impression at the appellate level, the Missouri Court of Appeals for the Western District of Missouri has held that the Missouri Human Rights Act (“MHRA”) does not prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation.

An employer’s parent corporation that did not “directly act[] in the interest” of the employer was not a covered employer under the Missouri Human Rights Act liable for harassment and retaliation, a Missouri Court of Appeals has ruled. Diaz v. AutoZoners, LLC, d/b/a AutoZone, et al., No. WD77861 (Mo. Ct. App. Nov. 10, 2015). The Court applied a modified “economic realities” test and reversed the jury verdict and judgment of $1,500,000 in punitive damages against the parent corporation.

Effective October 15, 2015, the minimum wage for employees working in St. Louis will increase to $8.25 per hour from the state minimum of $7.65 per hour pursuant to St. Louis City Ordinance 70078, which was passed on August 28, 2015.

Two recent Missouri Supreme Court decisions demonstrate Missouri courts will carefully scrutinize employment arbitration agreements in determining their validity. The Missouri Supreme Court in Baker v. Bristol Care, Inc., et al.1 invalidated an employment arbitration agreement that was agreed to by the parties at the time the employee was given a promotion and raise. The court held that continued employment for an at-will employee and mutual promises to arbitrate where the employer had the ability to modify the terms of the arbitration agreement did not constitute valid consideration to support the agreement. In State ex rel Hewitt v. The Honorable Kristine Kerr,2 the Missouri Supreme Court upheld an arbitration agreement, but held the arbitrator section provision unconscionable.

The Missouri Court of Appeals recently ruled that an employee who resigns rather than sign a non-compete agreement is entitled to unemployment benefits. Darr v. Roberts Marketing Group, LLC, , No. 13-07274R-A, (Mo. Ct. App. Apr. 22, 2014) In this case, David Darr appealed a finding by the Missouri Labor and Industrial Relations Commission denying him unemployment benefits.

On August 27, 2013, the Missouri Supreme Court issued an opinion that significantly changes the way employers will have to approach raising objections to improperly filed charges of discrimination under the Missouri Human Rights Act (MHRA).1 In a stunning change of MHRA jurisprudence, the opinion allows an employee to proceed with an MHRA lawsuit based on an untimely or other improperly filed charge of discrimination if the employer fails to object to the charge before the Missouri Commission on Human Rights (MCHR) and fails to seek judicial review of the MCHR’s improperly issued right-to-sue notice.