Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
For years, franchisors and franchisees alike have assumed that most of their 'managers' are exempt from federal (and parallel state) wage-and-hour 'overtime' rules requiring payment of wages calculated at the standard rate multiplied by 150% of the hours worked over 40 hours per week. But a recent flurry of class action lawsuits challenging the classification of certain categories of employees (for example, franchised restaurant or hotel unit managers or shift supervisors) as exempted 'management' employees who are not entitled to 'time-and-a-half' overtime pay has brought this issue under close scrutiny. Plaintiffs are winning many of these cases, sometimes with huge recoveries for employees who worked many hours of uncompensated, or compensated but at straight time, overtime. Earlier this year, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) jumped into the arena with proposed revisions to long-standing federal rules under the Federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) that define who is and who is not entitled to overtime pay for hours over 40 per week.
The DOL introduced the proposed regulations on March 31, 2003, and it is currently seeking comments regarding the new rules. The comment period closes on June 30, 2003, after which the DOL will consider the comments and probably modify the proposed regulations before enacting them in their final form. (At this time, the proposed new regulations are not yet enacted, and the extent to which they may be changed before enactment is unknown.)
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
There's current litigation in the ongoing Beach Boys litigation saga. A lawsuit filed in 2019 against Nevada residents Mike Love and his wife Jacquelyne in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada that alleges inaccurate payment by the Loves under the retainer agreement and seeks $84.5 million in damages.
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
The real property transfer tax does not apply to all leases, and understanding the tax rules of the applicable jurisdiction can allow parties to plan ahead to avoid unnecessary tax liability.