In a series of investigations and subsequent court actions, HR professionals have been identified as being potential targets for investigation of allegations of violations of antitrust laws related to employment practices,...more
11/11/2016
/ Anti-Competitive ,
Antitrust Provisions ,
Competition ,
Department of Justice (DOJ) ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Federal Trade Commission (FTC) ,
Hiring & Firing ,
Human Resources Professionals ,
Job Applicants ,
New Guidance ,
Non-Compete Agreements ,
Non-Solicitation Agreements ,
Recruitment Policies ,
Wage-Fixing
On September 2, 2015, a federal trial court in California approved a $415 million settlement of an antitrust class action filed against a number of Silicon Valley technology employers, including Apple Inc. and Google, among...more
9/8/2015
/ Antitrust Litigation ,
Apple ,
Class Action ,
Compliance ,
Department of Justice (DOJ) ,
Federal Trade Commission (FTC) ,
Google ,
Hiring & Firing ,
Popular ,
Recruitment Policies ,
Safe Harbors ,
Salary Caps ,
Settlement Agreements ,
Silicon Valley ,
Software Developers ,
Unfair Competition ,
Wage and Hour
The Eleventh Circuit has affirmed a district court's decision denying an employer's motion to compel the arbitration of a Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) collective action, finding that the court's decision was within its...more
Executive Summary: The U.S. Supreme Court has vacated the decision of a California state court, which held that a trial court should apply the factors set out in the California Supreme Court's 2007 decision in Gentry v....more
The Eighth Circuit recently upheld the validity of a mandatory arbitration agreement containing a class action waiver and ordered the arbitration of an employee's collective action under the Fair Labor Standards Act. See...more
1/16/2013
/ AT&T Mobility ,
Class Action Arbitration Waivers ,
D.R. Horton ,
D.R. Horton v NLRB ,
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) ,
Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) ,
Federal Arbitration Act ,
Mandatory Arbitration Clauses ,
NLRA ,
Owen v Bristol Care ,
Protected Concerted Activity