Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
These relatively simple questions are not always easy to answer, particularly when they pertain to pay issues under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). On Nov. 8, 2005, the U.S. Supreme Court provided some needed clarification in two consolidated cases ' IBP, Inc. v. Alvarez (No. 03-1238) and Tum v. Barber Foods, Inc. (No. 04-66).
In these cases, the Court addressed whether employees in meat and poultry processing plants must be paid for non-productive time they spend walking from locker rooms where they are required to don protective clothing and equipment, to the meat or poultry processing floor where they perform their work, and for the time they spend walking back to the locker rooms from the processing floor. In Tum, the Court also addressed whether time spent waiting in line to put on the protective clothing or to take it off was compensable. These cases turned on the application of Section 4(a) of the Portal-to-Portal Act of 1947, 29 U.S.C. '254(a), which excludes from the FLSA time spent walking, riding, or traveling to and from the location of the employee's principal work activity as well as other preliminary and postliminary activities.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
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.
A common question that commercial landlords and tenants face is which of them is responsible for a repair to the subject premises. These disputes often center on whether the repair is "structural" or "nonstructural."