Analysis and commentary by Reed Smith attorneys on developments in employment and labor law
The United States District Court of New Jersey recently dismissed an employee’s disability discrimination, failure to accommodate and retaliation claims, holding that neither the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (LAD) nor the New Jersey Compassionate Use Medical Marijuana Act (CUMMA) required the employer to waive its drug testing requirements.
In Cotto v. Ardagh Glass Packing…
With a few minor tweaks here and there, your company has probably relied on the same severance and employment-related settlement agreements for years. Sure, you touch base with your friendly neighborhood employment lawyer from time to time to ensure there haven’t been any significant legal developments that necessitate revisions. But aside from peripheral alterations, these agreements have, by and large, retained their same basic form and content.
Among the most important terms of your company’s “form” severance and settlement agreements is the confidentiality clause. This provision protects your business from the public disclosure of potentially damaging allegations of workplace wrongdoing. This is particularly important when the asserted allegations exaggerate or skew the facts or are flat out spurious. Or when the alleged misconduct was perpetrated by a rogue manager, unbeknownst to management. Regardless of the reason, the confidentiality clause is of paramount importance. In fact, outside of the employee’s release of claims, your company – like so many others – considers this clause to be the seminal term of the agreement. Without it, your company might be far more hesitant, if not outright unwilling, to enter into potentially costly severance and settlement arrangements with current and former employees.
Two recently enacted laws – one at the federal level and one spurred by New York legislators – threaten to topple the long-standing use of confidentiality clauses in severance and settlement agreements, at least in cases involving sexual harassment. Below, we discuss each of these laws, as well as how you and your company can navigate the proverbial minefield of recent nondisclosure-related legislation.…
Continue Reading Are confidentiality clauses about to become a relic in sexual harassment cases?
Get ready, set…but wait…maybe not… As employers gear up to meet the swiftly approaching December 1, 2016, deadline to implement the Department of Labor’s (‘DOL”) new overtime pay requirements for white-collar workers, 21 states, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and several other business groups filed legal challenges in various courts to halt the changes The DOL’s Final Rule was specifically designed to raise the salary of low-wage workers who perform exempt work, and therefore, do not qualify to be paid for overtime. Although some welcome this amendment to the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) for America’s workers, others believe the revisions basically ignore the type of work performed in favor of doubling the salary threshold for overtime exemption. Although many employers are wondering if the filing of the new lawsuits will top the new rules from coming into force, they are advised to continue working diligently to adjust their business practices in order to ensure compliance with the law’s requirements until further notice.
Continue Reading We May Not Have Heard The Last Word . . . The New White Collar Exemption Rules
The California Healthy Workplaces, Healthy Families Act of 2014 (“Healthy Families Act”) is fully effective July 1, 2015, including the significant potential for class-action liability for non-compliance. It is critical that employers ensure that their sick leave policy is current, given the ever-developing legal guidance. We have created a helpful list of common areas of confusion with this new law.
(1) General Background on the Healthy Families Act
The Healthy Families Act provides sick leave for absences from work for: (1) the diagnosis, care, or treatment (including preventive treatment) of an existing health condition of the employee or the employee’s family member, and (2) the employee being the victim of domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking. Family member is expansively defined to include children, parents, foster parents, legal guardians, siblings, grandparents, grandchildren, spouses, and domestic partners.
The law requires employers to include information regarding accrual and use of sick leave with their employees’ wage statements. Further, employers must preserve these sick leave records for three years. Moreover, relevant posters and individual notices should have been posted and delivered as of January 1, 2015. New hires must also receive pertinent individual notices explaining their rights under the Healthy Families Act.
(2) Employees Must Provide “Reasonable” Notice.
The Healthy Families Act limits employers to requiring only “reasonable advance notification” of employee use of sick leave. Where unforeseeable, an employer may only require notice when “practicable.”…
Continue Reading California Sick Leave To Go into Effect July 1 – Be Aware of These Common Traps
The changes to employees’ rights to take leave under the California Family Rights Act (CFRA) go into effect July 1, 2015. Your company should be prepared only if it has done the following:
The amended CFRA regulations synthesize the requirements for CFRA leave with those under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) to the extent there are no conflicts between the federal and state laws. Here are the key points in the revised CFRA regulations for employers:…
Continue Reading Is Your Company Prepared for the Changes to CFRA Leave?
The Colorado Supreme Court issued its highly anticipated decision in Coats v. DISH Network, holding that the recreational use of marijuana is not a lawful activity under Colorado’s Lawful Activities Act (“Act”). The Act prohibits employers from terminating employees for off-hours lawful activities. The court applied the Act broadly, holding that the recreational use…
It’s no secret that the EEOC—and even some courts—read Title VII to prohibit discrimination against transgender employees. A growing number of state and city laws also specifically include gender identity and/or expression as protected characteristics. But while employers may understand the legal dangers of firing someone for “coming out” as transgender, the extent of employers’ day-to-day obligations with respect to transgender employees in the workplace is far less clear. For example:
Two recent EEOC cases provide initial guidance for employers trying to navigate these tricky—and still relatively uncharted—employment law waters.…
Continue Reading Transgender at Work: How Employers Can Stay Off the EEOC Radar Screen
This post was also written by Megan E. Farrell.
On June 1, 2015, the United States Supreme Court held that a job applicant can establish religious discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 without proof that the employer had “actual knowledge” of the applicant’s need for an accommodation; instead, the applicant “need only show that his [or her] need for an accommodation was a motivating factor in the employer’s decision” (emphasis added). Writing for eight of the Court’s nine Justices, Justice Scalia explained that employers “may not make an applicant’s religious practice, confirmed or otherwise, a factor in employment decisions.” EEOC v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc., No. 14-86, ___ S. Ct. ___ (2015).…
On May 27, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) published updated model Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) notices and certification forms. Copies of the updated forms, which should be used through May 31, 2018, are available on the DOL’s website.
The most notable change to the forms is their reference to the Genetic…
This post was written by Cindy S. Minniti and Mark S. Goldstein.
Today’s New York employment law landscape is increasingly dynamic, with a constant stream of newly issued legislation and judicial opinions. To keep our readers current on the latest developments, we will share regular summaries of recent developments affecting Empire State employers. Here’s what happened in March and April 2015:
Minimum Wage Hike Suffers a Setback
New York lawmakers recently dealt a significant, but not necessarily fatal, blow to Gov. Cuomo’s plan to raise the minimum wage to $10.50 per hour (and to $11.50 in NYC). In late March, state legislators surprisingly omitted the proposed wage hike from the state’s upcoming annual budget. The debate over whether to yet again raise the state’s minimum wage – which is already slated to increase to $9.00/hour on December 31, 2015 – is now left to unfold in the State Assembly and Senate over the next six weeks, until the 2015 legislative session ends on June 17.
State Assembly Passes “Family Care” Leave Bill
On March 17, the State Assembly passed a bill that would provide up to 12 weeks of partially paid “family care” leave to employees statewide. Under the bill, employees would be able to take a leave of absence, and receive up to one-half of their regular wages: (i) to participate in providing care for a family member’s serious health condition; (ii) to bond with a newly born or newly adopted child; or (iii) because of any qualifying exigency, as interpreted under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), arising out of the active duty of certain family members. Like FMLA leave, the proposed state family care leave law would allow employees to take family care leave on an intermittent or reduced schedule basis.
The family care leave bill is now under consideration by the Republican-controlled Senate, which earlier this year recommended its own family leave law. That proposal would have provided employees with up to six weeks of leave, with partial pay, for certain qualifying exigencies, but would have required the state to fund the program, at least in the first year. Passage of a family care leave bill – in any form – is hardly a certainty and will likely take a backseat to other initiatives that Gov. Cuomo is supporting, such as the minimum wage increase and the Women’s Equality Act.…
Continue Reading New York Employment Roundup: March & April 2015