The new Active Case Enforcement (ACE) initiative of the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) is expected to lead to broader, more aggressive compliance investigations by the agency. OFCCP is the U.S. Department of Labor division charged with ensuring that federal contractors comply with Equal Employment Opportunity laws and Executive Orders.
With a zero-tolerance attitude toward workplace bullying, employers can minimize the impact of the workplace bullying legislation that is bound to come to light in the near future, and in the meantime, maintain a safer and more productive workplace.
The decision to submit all employment disputes to mandatory arbitration only should be made after a careful analysis of the pros and cons so that the employer can determine whether the perceived benefits of arbitration actually are worth the significant disadvantages.
For corporate attorneys, questions about how an employer can limit both the costs associated with and exposure to wage-and-hour claims have become ever more difficult. Employer-employee arbitration agreements may be part of the answer.
An in-depth review of a recent important case.
Many experienced matrimonial lawyers have not yet been trained in the collaborative process. However, many litigators have learned that the language of collaboration will serve them admirably in their work and will enhance the outcome for their clients positively.
The U.S. Senate has "quietly" ratified two important international conventions. This article discusses what effect they will have on statutes in the U.S. that affect family support and international custody orders.
With trepidation from an advocacy community wary of the Supreme Court, the fight over same-sex marriage has now shifted to federal court.
A recent decision provides a guiding beacon for identifying a number of forensic errors that are frequently encountered but often overlooked. It is, therefore, eminently instructive for custody courts, attorneys, and evaluators.
A recent New York appellate decision addressed the issue of whether suitable age and discretion service could properly be made on one corporate respondent tenant by serving an employee of another corporate respondent tenant.
