Regulatory Uncertainty: Benefits-Related Legal Challenges in a Post-Chevron World — Troutman Pepper Podcast
Employment Law Now VIII-145 – Status Update: Injunctions for FTC Non-Compete Ban and DOL Overtime Exemption Regs
Legal Alert | Reign It In: Federal Court Enjoins DOL's Expansion of Davis-Bacon Coverage
Clocking in with PilieroMazza: New Board Cases Provide Guidance for SCA Price Adjustments
Non-Disparagement Settlements in New Jersey, DOL's AI Guidelines, OSHA Regions Shift - Employment Law This Week®
DOL’s Expanded Overtime Salary Limits, EEOC’s Sexual Harassment Guidance, NY’s Mandatory Paid Prenatal Leave - Employment Law This Week®
What's the Tea in L&E? Alert: Salary Threshold for Exempt Employees Increases to $58,656
VIDEO: Major Changes Coming for Employers
Employment Law Now VIII-143 - Federal Agency Update (Part 2 of 2)
Employment Law Now VIII-142 - Federal Agency Update (Part 1 of 2)
#WorkforceWednesday: New DOL Rules, U.S. Government Changes Race and Ethnicity Categorization - Employment Law This Week®
DE Under 3: An Explanation of the Current Federal Budget Bill Confusion
#WorkforceWednesday: Federal Agencies Pushing Boundaries Met with Backlash, Impacts of SCOTUS Chevron Deference - Employment Law This Week®
The Burr Morning: Key Legal Developments to Watch for in 2024
#WorkforceWednesday: DOL’s Final Rule on Worker Classification, NLRB Joint-Employer Rule Challenged, SpaceX Sues NLRB - Employment Law This Week®
Excitement, Turbulence & Confusion: The Top 10 Employment Law Issues That Affected Federal Contractors in 2023
Successor Government Contractor Hiring Obligations Change: DOL’s Long Awaited Nondisplacement Rule
The Burr Broadcast: New Independent Contractor Rule
DE Under 3: US DOL's WHD Published Its “Employee or Independent Contractor” Classification Final Rule
DE Under 3: FAR Council Submitted for OMB Approval Proposed Rule on “Pay Equity and Transparency in Federal Contracting”
Seyfarth Synopsis: Earlier this month, the Ninth Circuit chose to side with the Second Circuit, and not the Sixth Circuit, to opine that mortgage underwriters fail to meet the FLSA’s administrative exemption from overtime...more
The financial services area received a defeat earlier this year when the United States Supreme Court in March upheld the Department of Labor's (DOL) Administrative Interpretation concluding that mortgage loan officers do not...more
The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Ass’n invalidated a significant line of D.C. Circuit case law known, after the leading case, as the Paralyzed Veterans doctrine. A case involving a series...more
For the past several years, an action by the Mortgage Bankers Association has been brewing in the courts challenging the U.S. Department of Labor (“DOL”) for issuing contradictory opinion letters on whether mortgage loan...more
The Supreme Court recently rejected a challenge to the validity of a 2010 interpretation by the U.S. Department of Labor (the “DOL”), which had concluded that the administrative exemption of the Fair Labor Standards Act...more
Federal agencies now have the authority to interpret their own rules. On March 9, 2015, in Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Ass’n, No. 13-1041, slip op. (U.S. Mar. 9, 2015), the United States Supreme Court effectively gave...more
In 2004, the DOL revamped its regulations regarding the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) administrative exemption. In 2006, the Bush DOL issued an opinion letter finding that mortgage loan officers qualified for the...more
The U.S. Supreme Court decided in Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association that federal agencies are not required to use the Administrative Procedure Act's (APA) notice and comment procedures when issuing or making changes to...more
The legal ping-pong match between the Department of Labor (DOL) and the Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) over whether mortgage loan officers are eligible for overtime appears to be at an end. The Supreme Court recently...more
On March 9, 2015, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that when a federal administrative agency wants to amend or repeal an “interpretive rule,” it does not have to follow the notice-and-comment procedures set forth in the...more
On March 9, 2015, the Supreme Court wiped away a longstanding judicial doctrine that had placed greater procedural requirements on a federal agency when it changes its prior interpretation of a federal regulation....more
On March 9, 2015, the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Perez v. Mortg. Bankers Ass’n, U.S., No. 13-1041, effectively ended the use of the Fair Labor Standards Act’s (“FLSA”) administrative exemption for mortgage-loan...more
On March 9, 2015, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the Paralyzed Veterans doctrine, which requires an agency to use the notice-and-comment procedures of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) when issuing a...more
On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Ass’n et al. The case, if decided against the Department of Labor (Thomas E. Perez is the Secretary of Labor), will have a significant...more
On December 1, 2014, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association and Nickols v. Mortgage Bankers Association to address whether a federal agency must engage in notice-and-comment rulemaking...more