Updating your employee handbook is a critical annual initiative for an HR department. It ensures compliance with industry standards and federal and state laws.
Last week the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) blew the proverbial lifeguard whistle on employer non-compete agreements and said they were going to order “everybody out of the pool.”
In a time when labor hoarding is occurring in some sectors, yet in others, layoffs are happening, employers with H-1Bs need to follow a process or it could be a costly mistake in which an H-1B is not found to be properly terminated.
California is once again looking at making changes to how employers can use information from background checks in employment decisions. The California Civil Rights Department’s Civil Right Council released their most recent draft of changes to their Fair Employment and Housing Ace (FEHA) this past December. This update addresses proposed changes to the use of criminal history for employment decisions.
Although a number of new laws started January 1, there are three that stand out for HR professionals outside of all the pay transparency laws. These three laws were encompassed in the FY 2023 Omnibus Spending Bill, and all had bipartisan support.
Although it would be expected that the ending of the year should be a quiet one, the Biden administration is going out with a bang that will cause some heartache for employers. Below is a listing of some of the changes to expect going forward.
GINA or the Genetic Information Non-discrimination Act has been around for well over 14 years. It prohibits discrimination by an employer against employees or applicants because of genetic information. It also prohibits employers from using genetic information when making employment decisions and restricts them from requesting, requiring, or even purchasing genetic information as well as limiting disclosure of such information if they obtain it.
The Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) has submitted a new scheduling letter and itemized listing for review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). The present scheduling letter expires in 2023.
Many human resources professionals have experienced the worker that for one reason or another gets fed up and just walks off the job. It’s unfortunate and disrupting but also sets the machinations of employment policy and law in motion. A recent Michigan Court of Appeals case affirms that employees that walk off the job not only voluntarily quit, but also disqualify themselves from unemployment compensation benefits.
For the first time in four decades, the Michigan Democratic Party holds control of the state government. Employers have benefited from GOP control over the years as unfriendly employer legislation was bottled up in committees never to see the light of day. With the Michigan Legislature now controlled by a Democrat majority and a Democrat Governor there is not much to stop the flood of pro-labor legislation that has been held back for years.
No poaching agreements are arrangements between employers where the parties agree they will not hire one another’s workers. They are also illegal. Last week a healthcare staffing company entered a plea deal with the Department of Justice that held them criminally liable for having a deal in place with an un-named competitor to not raise wages of nurses working in a county school district and to not hire nurses from one another.
Earlier this year, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization that abortion and access to abortion is not a constitutional right and reverted back to state laws for determining the legality of the procedure. In other words, only states have the power to regulate abortion and access to it.
Yesterday, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) published a proposed rule that adopts a six step economic realities test for determining whether a worker is an independent contractor or not. Publication of this rule will rescind the Trump-era rule narrowing the definition of independent contractor.
The current U.S. Supreme Court endorses workers’ rights when it comes to expressing religious values at work. In the last term’s case of Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, No. 21-418 (2022), Kennedy was a football coach who kneeled and prayed on the 50-yard line after a game. He was suspended by the Bremerton School District in the state of Washington for whom he worked.
The first Monday in October heralds the start of the U.S. Supreme Court’s (SCOTUS) new term each year. Last year saw Roe v. Wade and the right to abortion overturned. This resulted in the states and their voters now having to decide on that right. To date, this year the conservative U.S. Supreme Court has announced several new “blockbuster” cases it will hear that may impact employers.
California legislature passed S.B. 1162 and is currently waiting for the Governor’s signature, creating new obligations for California employers by amending the earlier pay reporting requirements.
A recent article published in CCH HRAnswersNow Expert Insights looks at the issue of FMLA coverage for remote workers. In this case, a person worked from their home which was well outside what could be reasonably considered within the coverage area of the FMLA.
Yesterday, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) issued new proposed rulemaking that eliminates the “direct and immediate” control specification in the 2020 rules and adopts a broader rule that finds joint employment if the employers “share or co-determine” essential job terms and conditions. The rule proposal was passed with two board members dissenting.
Earlier this year, the OFCCP released Directive 2022-01: Advancing Pay Equity Through Compensation Analysis. There was a lot of controversy over the directive, both with respect to expected analysis and analysis to be submitted when a compliance officer requested it. For the latter, the agency generated discord in the compliance sector, because it was seemingly saying attorney/client privilege can be overturned by the agency.
Of the five major Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) exemptions (there are close to 21 other FLSA industry or job exemptions) one of the most misunderstood and misused is the Administrative Exemption.
A new case has been filed in the Northern District of Texas which could upend the Fair Labor Standards Act law (FLSA). The new case attacks the two-prong approach of the U.S. Department of Labor of establishing exempt employee thresholds using a salary hurdle test and then the duties test.