Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Retaliation claims are on the rise. Commonly brought under state or federal discrimination laws, wage/hour laws, Sarbanes-Oxley, or other regulatory schemes, such claims are becoming more prevalent. One likely reason for the rise in such claims is that they are viable even when the claim of discrimination or illegal conduct that underlies the alleged retaliation is determined not to have merit. This article contains savvy advice for employers.
Unwary employers, particularly federal contractors or subcontractors, who do not regularly review their own compensation practices, remain at risk for costly litigation. Here's why.
Navigating the treacherous waters of federal employment law is not easy. Well-intentioned employers can unknowingly violate some of the more complicated (albeit well-known) laws like the Family & Medical Leave Act and the Americans With Disabilities Act due to a lack of familiarity with the applicable regulations or the case law interpreting them. When an employer has operations in multiple jurisdictions, the analysis becomes even more complex due to circuit splits on pivotal issues.
Employers are increasingly faced with the challenge of responding to employee requests to be relieved of work requirements related to religious beliefs and observance. This article provides general background regarding the definition of 'religion' and 'religious belief' in the context of providing a religious accommodation, and an overview of the growing body of case law that deals with the employee's right to seek and the employer's obligation to provide a 'reasonable accommodation.'
Features
Federal district courts have recently denied class certification in instances in which the plaintiffs sought medical monitoring, citing causation issues better addressed on an individual basis.
In this article, we discuss the issue of federal officer removal, <i>i.e.</i>, the removal of a state action to federal court on the ground that the government had such control over the defendant that the defendant was essentially acting as a federal officer.
Part One of this series discussed the advantages of coordinating state and federal mass torts cases, and specifically addressed New York law. The conclusion describes the process of applying for coordination in New York State.
When it comes to determining whether a product is a drug, a cosmetic, or both under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act of 1938, the focus has been mostly on the marketing and promotional claims related to the product, at least based on available FDA guidance, case law, and recent enforcement actions. As the market for cosmeceuticals continues to grow, however, and if more products are formulated with ingredients found in FDA-approved prescription drugs, that focus could change.