Non-Competition, Non-Solicitation and Non-Disclosure Agreements
When negotiating non-competition, non-solicitation and non-disclosure agreements, there are many issues that should be taken into consideration, regardless of whether counsel is given to the employer or employee. For example, is the agreement or restrictive covenant necessary to protect the employer's legitimate business interests? Is the agreement supported by adequate consideration? Is the restrictive covenant reasonably limited as to time and geographical location in which the conduct is prohibited? What law will apply to the agreement?
Features
Transgender Employees
Legislatures and courts alike in several jurisdictions have extended existing anti-discrimination laws to transgender people, and some employers have followed suit with changes to their non-discrimination policies. Employers are thus advised not only to familiarize themselves with the current legal landscape for transgender rights, but also to consider the practical implications of such laws on their own efforts to provide an inclusive and non-discriminatory workplace environment for transgender employees. This two-part article will explore the legal landscape and its implications.
Features
Changes to Retiree Health Benefits
The first part of this article discussed the current state of the law with regard to the legal standing of unions to represent and litigate on behalf of retirees. The conclusion herein addresses cases involving the presumption of vesting, and offers tips for managing changes in retirement plans and negotiating future plans.
Features
IRS Issues Limited Relief on Section 409A
The IRS recently issued Notice 2007-78, which provides additional guidance and limited transition relief on Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code. There are still actions required by the end of 2007.
Features
'Tip Pooling' and Wage and Hour Laws
There have been numerous cases involving various challenges to employer 'tip-pooling' policies, particularly in Massachusetts and California, with wait staff and other restaurant employees claiming that such policies violate state wage and hour laws. This article describes this recent line of cases, which are of particular interest to employers and employees in the restaurant or hospitality industries, but which have extended to other industries as well. The article also suggests guidelines for employers in the restaurant and hospitality industries to adopt so that their tip-pooling policies do not run afoul of state wage and hour laws.
Changes to Retiree Health Benefits
Changes in accounting rules, spiraling health-care costs, increased competition and changing demographics converge to make it economically infeasible for some employers to continue providing such benefits at the generous levels of years past. Consequently, many companies have been compelled to modify their retiree health plans in ways that reduce or eliminate some benefits or that require retirees to pay more out of pocket. These changes have resulted in an avalanche of litigation.
E-Discovery Rules
For employers that have, to date, managed to avoid battles over e-discovery, time is short. Every hour spent preparing for the inevitable discovery dispute before litigation commences will save incalculable angst once litigation starts, and can make the difference between winning or losing important legal battles. This article discusses these emerging realities in light of the Federal Rules' new e-discovery provisions and provides guidance to in-house counsel on how to prepare employers better for their obligations under the rules.
Employment-Based Visa Indecision
The government giveth and the government taketh away. Two weeks after announcing that most of the employment-based immigrant visa categories would be current on July 1, 2007, the Department of State ('DOS') reversed its announcement by stating that effective July 2, no visa numbers were available for employment-based immigrant visa categories, and further, would not become available until Oct. 1, 2007 (under fiscal year 2008 numbers).
Features
Federal Contractors and Executive Order 11246
This past year has seen a flurry of activity under Executive Order 11246 ('EO 11246'), the law that governs the administration of affirmative action programs of employers that have certain government contracts or subcontracts. In the wake of these new changes, this article offers suggestions of best practices relating to one of the most noteworthy developments for EO 11246 compliance: the 'Internet Applicant' rule, which became effective on Feb. 6, 2006.
Need Help?
- Prefer an IP authenticated environment? Request a transition or call 800-756-8993.
- Need other assistance? email Customer Service or call 1-877-256-2472.
MOST POPULAR STORIES
- Second Circuit Rejects Arbitration of Debtor's Asserted Discharge ViolationA bankruptcy court properly denied a bank's motion to compel arbitration of a debtor's asserted violation of the court's discharge injunction, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held.Read More ›
- Reining in the Inequitable Conduct DefenseResponding to views from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and elsewhere about the unintended consequences of the current inequitable conduct doctrine, a divided <i>en banc</i> Federal Circuit decision issued on May 25, 2011 adjusted the standard of the materiality element to make this defense harder to establish.Read More ›
- 'Customary Operations' or A Vacant Building?Many times, courts are faced with the question of whether a loss location is 'vacant' under a commercial property policy when trying to determine if the building owner or lessee is conducting customary operations. This article explores various decisions across the United States as to what is considered 'customary operations,' thereby rendering the property 'vacant.'Read More ›
- Removing Restrictive Covenants In New YorkIn Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?Read More ›
- Judge Rules Shaquille O'Neal Will Face Securities Lawsuit for Promotion, Sale of NFTsA federal district court in Miami, FL, has ruled that former National Basketball Association star Shaquille O'Neal will have to face a lawsuit over his promotion of unregistered securities in the form of cryptocurrency tokens and that he was a "seller" of these unregistered securities.Read More ›