News & Analysis as of

France: A Court of Appeals Decision Provides Helpful Guidance Regarding an Employer’s Obligations When Consulting with Employee...

Before agreeing and executing a business sale involving a transfer of a business, an international publishing company (Wolters Kluwer) consulted its works council. The works council refused to deliver its opinion and issued...more

Trends in New Jersey Employment Law - September 2014

Third Circuit Renders Important Decisions on FMLA and FLSA - In recent weeks, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit rendered a trio of significant employment law decisions....more

Sixth Circuit Says Manufacturer's Testing for Legally Prescribed Drugs May Not be Prohibited ADA Medical Exam

Americans’ use of prescription painkillers, anti-anxiety medications and other drugs with psychotropic effects has exploded over the past decade. Many of these medications include warnings for persons who take them with...more

JOINT EMPLOYER: When is a company considered the employer of another company’s employees?

During the last several months, a number of government agencies and courts have taken the position that a company can be considered the employer of another company’s employees for purposes of employment law obligations. Most...more

Sixth Circuit Reminds Employers of Notice Requirement Under the FMLA

The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit recently upheld a ruling that FedEx interfered with a former employee's rights under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) by failing to give her adequate notice of...more

Offsite Fabrication at Permanent Facility Not Subject to Prevailing Wage Law

California's prevailing wage law generally requires that workers employed on public works projects be paid the local prevailing wage for work of a similar character. In Sheet Metal Workers' International Association, Local...more

Inability to Show Receipt of FMLA Notice Defeats Employer's Summary Judgment Motion

Why do lawyers insist that everything be sent by certified or registered mail? A new case from the Third Circuit Court of Appeals demonstrates how the inability to prove that a required notice had actually been mailed...more

California Court Determines Arbitrator Must Decide Whether Class Claims Are Subject to Arbitration Agreement

When an employee who has signed an arbitration agreement files a lawsuit alleging individual claims along with class action claims, and the trial court has ordered him to take his individual claims to arbitration, what...more

California Appellate Court Tells Employers to Pay Part of Employees' Cell Phone Bills or Face Class Action Liability

On August 12, 2014, the California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, ruled in Cochran v. Schwan's Home Service, Inc. that employers are required to reimburse employees for all business-related calls made or received...more

BREAKING: 6th Circuit Will Rehear Ford Telecommuting/Reasonable Accommodation Case

Law 360 reports this morning that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit has agreed to rehear the EEOC v. Ford Motor Co. case, which I reported on (and disagreed with) in April. The original decision, holding that...more

August 2014 Monthly Independent Contractor Compliance and Misclassification Update

This month’s headline development are the seismic decisions, issued on August 27, 2014 by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, concluding as a matter of law that FedEx Ground had misclassified over 2,300 drivers...more

Washington Court of Appeals Expands "Jeopardy" Element of Claim for Wrongful Discharge in Violation of Public Policy

This month the Washington State Court of Appeals, Division III issued a ruling in Becker v. Community Health Systems, Inc. that expands protections in a wrongful termination action based on violation of a public policy....more

Act Now Advisory: California Court of Appeals Holds That Employees Must Be Reimbursed for Using Personal Cell Phones for...

In Cochran v. Schwan's Home Service Inc., the California Court of Appeals posed the following question: "Does an employer always have to reimburse an employee for the reasonable expense of the mandatory use of a personal cell...more

Flash No. 42 FedEx Ground Drivers Found to be Employees: A Sequel To Ruiz

In a decision issued on August 27, the Ninth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals, in a case captioned Alexander v. FedEx Ground Package System, determined that FedEx Ground drivers were employees as a matter of law under...more

California Supreme Court: Holding Franchisor Liable as Employer Depends on Level of Control Over Day-to-Day Employment Decisions

Patterson v. Domino’s Pizza, LLC, No. S204543 (August 28, 2014): On August 28, 2014, the California Supreme Court issued a decision holding that a franchisor that did not exhibit the characteristics of an “employer” was not...more

California Court Interprets Vague Language in Arbitration Agreement in Favor of Employee

Rebolledo v. Tilly’s Inc., No. G048625 (July 8, 2014): In a recent decision, a California Court of Appeal held that an employer cannot compel arbitration of a wage claim when the language in the parties’ arbitration agreement...more

California Employers Must Reimburse Employees for Mandatory Work-Related Cell Phone Use

In a ruling that may spawn a wave of California employment-related class action litigation, a California Court of Appeal has ruled that employers must always reimburse employees for “some reasonable percentage” of their cell...more

On whose dime? Court rules California employers must pay employee cell phone expenses

In a world where mobile devices outnumber both personal computers and humans, it’s not surprising that we use our mobile devices for both business and pleasure. In a published opinion sure to wreak havoc with workplace bring...more

Eleventh Circuit Upholds $83,000 Fine Against Employer for Failure to Send COBRA Dental Coverage Notice

Employers know that the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA) requires them to send qualifying employees notice of their ability to continue group medical, dental and vision plan coverage at their own expense...more

Prompt Payment Requirements That Apply to Employees Who Quit Also Apply to Employees Who Retire

California’s Third District Court of Appeal recently concluded that the final wage payment requirements and waiting time penalties prescribed by Labor Code sections 202 and 203 apply not only to employees who quit, but also...more

Think Before You “Snail Mail” Those FMLA Notices

When I conduct employment trainings, I often caution executives and managers to think before they email. In my experience, people tend to be more casual and to use poorer judgment when they email than when they write a memo...more

Sexy ADA Issue: Bad Breakup May Not Justify Employer-Mandated Medical Exam

Rarely does one get a case that involves a cutting-edge Americans with Disabilities Act issue combined with wild, crazy, passionate, irrationally exuberant, tempestuous, adulterous romance. Well, folks, today is your lucky...more

The California Court of Appeal Finds That an Employee Expense is an Employee Expense is an Employee Expense

On Tuesday, August 12, 2014, the California Court of Appeal (Second Appellate District) published a decision that could impact many employers in California. The threshold question at issue in the case was whether an employer...more

Partial-Day Leave Deductions Lawful for Exempt Employees

A California court of appeal recently confirmed that employers may require exempt employees to use accrued leave for partial-day absences, even if shorter than four hours. In Rhea v. General Atomics, plaintiff Lori Rhea, on...more

Court of Appeals Rejects Mandatory Treble Damages Under Wage Payment and Collection Law

Last week, in the case of Peters v. Early Healthcare Giver, Inc., the Court of Appeals had another opportunity to reflect on the Maryland Wage Payment and Collection Law (“WPCL”) and specifically discuss the application of...more

75 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 3