Social Media + Employees = Hot Mess
#BigIdeas2020: NLRB’s Actions Impact Employers in 2020 - Employment Law This Week® - Trending News
The Tenth Circuit recently reaffirmed that employers may lawfully enforce a policy against surreptitious recordings. In Spagnolia v. Charter Communications, LLC, the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit...more
You are about to enter another dimension. A journey into the world of discrimination and retaliation. Consider, if you will, the case of an employee who suspects that he or she is about to be fired or demoted for misconduct...more
Social media usage remains ubiquitous in 2024, and a recent trend sees the increased use of social media by employees to document their experiences with layoffs and disciplinary actions in the workplace. ...more
When people think of a “protected class,” they often think of age, race, gender, or disability. While those are some of the classes protected by anti-discrimination laws, often-overlooked classes include honorably discharged...more
Our June update includes a new gender critical philosophical belief case exploring some new areas (such as the nature of the workplace), a case on redaction of disclosure documents and whether the redacted material was...more
California’s anti-SLAPP statute (Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16) aims to protect defendants from meritless lawsuits designed to chill “protected activity” — i.e., the exercise of rights of petition (litigation) or...more
The Fourth Circuit recently reaffirmed that not all forms of opposition constitute protected activity. In Bills v. WVNH EMP, LLC, the Fourth Circuit unanimously affirmed the Southern District of West Virginia’s Order...more
On June 13, 2024, an administrative law judge (ALJ) for the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) ruled that overly broad noncompete and nonsolicitation provisions in an employment agreement violated an employee’s labor...more
The U.S. Supreme Court recently held that proving an employer’s retaliatory intent is not required for whistleblowers seeking protection under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. In Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC, 144 S. Ct. 445 (2024),...more
When a property owner brings a regulatory taking / inverse condemnation claim based on a city or county’s zoning decisions, the owner often provides context and history, including public statements made by staff, board...more
Both the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and the First U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals weighed in on employees wearing Black Lives Matter items while at work, with the Board siding with the employee and the federal...more
“Third party” or “associational” retaliation is reprisal taken by an employer against someone other than the person who engaged in “protected conduct.” In 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Title VII’s anti-retaliation...more
The long and winding road of the Secretary of State for Business and Trade v. Mercer case has taken yet another U-turn. The Supreme Court’s judgment, published on April 17, has brought some clarity and potentially some...more
Can you prevent your employees from handing out pro-union paraphernalia if they’re on a paid break? After brewing on the issue, the D.C. Circuit says no, backing baristas in the first of five National Labor Relations Board...more
Recently, the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) ruled that Home Depot — “Where Doers Get More Done” — had done too much when it discharged an employee, Antonio Morales, for refusing to remove the hand-drawn letters...more
In Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC the United States Supreme Court resolved a circuit split, holding that whistleblowers asserting retaliation claims under Sarbanes-Oxley must prove protected activity was a contributing factor...more
Tuesday, February 20, 2024: Telecommuting Decreased in 2022, But Still Far Above Pre-Pandemic Numbers, U.S. Census Bureau Reported - Among U.S. workers, 15.2 percent worked from home in 2022, down from almost 17.9 percent...more
In a case issued on February 21, 2024, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or the Board) has continued its expansion of the definition of "protected, concerted activity" under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations...more
Recently, the Supreme Court of the United States issued a decision in Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC holding that whistleblowers are not required to prove their employer acted with “retaliatory intent” to be protected under...more
Welcome to this edition of the FP Snapshot on workplace safety, where we take a quick snapshot look at a recent significant workplace law development that affects your safety and health programs. This edition is devoted to...more
The National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”), in a 3-1 decision, held that an employee’s display on their work uniform of “BLM,” an acronym for Black Lives Matter, constituted protected concerted activity under Section 7 of...more
On February 8, 2024, the United States Supreme Court issued an opinion in Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC, 601 U.S. ___(2024), a case involving a former UBS employee’s claim that he was terminated for making an internal report...more
On February 8, 2024, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) unanimously ruled in Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC that employers can violate whistleblower protection statutes without evidence establishing retaliatory...more
In a unanimous ruling, the Supreme Court reaffirmed the whistleblower protections of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in the case, Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC et al. (February 8, 2024). The Supreme Court’s decision reaffirms an...more
The US Supreme Court ruled in Murray v. UBS Securities LLC that whistleblowers under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) need not prove retaliatory intent. This ruling is consistent with current precedent for Energy Reorganization...more