President Trump had an eventful first year in the labor and employment arena. With his first year in office now wrapping up, this is a perfect time to look back at how the Trump Administration's policies have shaped labor and employment law issues at both the federal and state level, and where we expect to go in 2018.
A federal appeals court offered a clear rule earlier in 2017, in holding that employees must be paid for breaks lasting 20 minutes or less, but private suits on that issue have been few, and appear poised to remain so, practitioners say.
How can companies make sure they have sexual harassment policies in place to protect interests and employees? The authors talked to several attorneys about common pitfalls and the lay of the land in the corporate environment right now. Here are highlights from those conversations.
When a corporation determines to file for Chapter 11 protection, questions concerning the status of existing labor and employment agreements and viability of employee claims immediately arise. Indeed, there are litanies of potential pitfalls for companies that file for bankruptcy without strictly following the requirements of federal or state employment laws.
It was only a couple of years ago that a jury rejected Ellen Pao's gender discrimination claims and rendered a defense verdict in favor of her former employer, a prominent Silicon Valley venture capital firm. Now, issues of bias and pay equity are again taking center stage, with almost daily media reports about Silicon Valley's gender problem and a continuing list of companies and notable Silicon Valley figures being taken to task with allegations of inappropriate conduct toward women.
The heightened awareness of sexual harassment in the workplace has resulted in a surge of client calls to plaintiffs attorneys who litigate such claims.Meanwhile, defense attorneys, bracing for more litigation, said they are fielding more calls from corporate clients that want training conferences and advice on how to handle internal complaints and internal investigations.
In this article, the authors discuss some recent controversies involving employee speech and the laws governing employers' ability to regulate and respond to disruptive speech in the workplace.
Scotus Review of Dodd-Frank to Change the Landscape
On June 26, 2017, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Digital Realty Trust Inc. v. Somers, to review a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit decision regarding SEC whistleblowing protections. The Court's ruling is highly anticipated, as it will clarify the landscape for whistleblower protections.
On Oct. 2, 2017, the Supreme Court was set to hear argument as to whether class action waivers in arbitration agreements are valid and enforceable. Thirty-six amicus briefs were submitted to the Supreme Court on this issue, underscoring that regardless of the Court's decision, there will be sweeping implications for both employers and employees.
Construing Them Broadly, But the Exemptions Narrowly
FLSA cases holding against employers typically invoke a canon of construction that the FLSA should be construed broadly, and any of its exemptions narrowly. But this canon has a dubious foundation and tends to be applied inconsistently to justify a result.
