A manufacturer cannot assume that just because its product is in compliance with the CPSIA, the product is also in compliance with California's statutes, or vice versa. Ultimately, only a product-specific analysis can determine whether a product that complies with the CPSIA is also compliant with California's AB 1108 and Proposition 65.
This article discusses both the general rule that bonus payments must be included in the "regular rate" calculation for overtime purposes, and the three most common exceptions to this general rule. It also tests your knowledge of these rules.
Continuation of an analysis of Kasten v. Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics Corp., wherein the Seventh Circuit held that an employee's strictly oral complaints about allegedly improper wage practices did not implicate the FLSA's prohibition of retaliation against those who have "filed any complaint."
The Third Circuit recently delivered a significant clarification on economic damages in employment matters. In Eshelman v. Agere Systems Inc., the court held that plaintiffs in employment-discrimination suits may recover for the negative tax consequences of receiving a lump-sum award for back pay.
There is considerable information available in cyberspace ' much of it interesting, some of it damning, and some of it false. Obtaining that information feels risk free and virtually untraceable. However, the universe of employment laws applies to much of what happens when virtual sleuthing yields tangible job consequences.
Cost-control methods in law departments are more than just talk as cost pressures are creating a fundamental shift in the management and operation of the departments and their interaction with outside counsel, results of a recent Hildebrandt International survey suggest.
Over the past several months, the DOJ has begun investigating several leading technology companies for possible violations of the antitrust laws. One focus of the multi-faceted investigation is whether certain companies have violated antitrust laws by agreeing among themselves not to recruit one another's employees.
Corporate counsel should note recent legal developments surrounding spoliation ' the destruction or significant alteration of evidence, or the failure to preserve property for another's use as evidence in pending or reasonably foreseeable litigation. This violation occurs when one party intentionally or negligently breaches its duty to preserve potentially discoverable evidence.
While companies conduct internal investigations for many reasons, the results of these investigations are often shared with the government. But the disclosure required by that cooperation leaves open the real possibility that the attorney-client privilege and the work product doctrine may be waived.
A new federal appeals court decision promises to give significant pause to corporate counsel, particularly in-house tax attorneys. To their dismay, the First Circuit has ruled that no amount of anticipation of litigation, nor the intimate involvement of legal counsel, can ever immunize so-called "tax accrual workpapers" from discovery by the IRS.
