Protective Gear

News & Analysis as of May 18, 2013

As Supreme Court Defines “Clothes,” Biggest Impact Will Be on Judiciary’s Deference to DOL

Ohio Supreme Court Offers Clarification of Employment Intentional Tort Statute

by Brian Perry | Dinsmore & Shohl LLP on 3/5/2013

In a decision favorable to Ohio employers, the Ohio Supreme Court recently clarified the circumstances under which an employer can be found to have committed an “employment intentional tort.” The Court’s decision, in Hewitt...more

Under FLSA Section 203(o) Does the Term "Changing Clothes" Include the Time a Manufacturing Employee Spends Putting On and Taking...

by Louis Santiago | Holland & Knight LLP on 2/27/2013

For minimum wage and over-time purposes, Section 203(o) of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) states that "hours worked" does not include time spent "changing clothes" if that time is excluded from working time by the...more

As Supreme Court Defines “Clothes,” Biggest Impact Will Be on Judiciary’s Deference to DOL [Video]

by LXBN on 2/26/2013

It’s one of those cases quick to generate a smirk as individuals quickly glance the basic facts: yes, the Supreme Court will indeed rule on the definition of “clothes” in Sandifer v. U.S. Steel. But the bigger issue here is...more

February 2013 U.S. Labor and Employment Update

by Alan Berkowitz, Jennifer Burdick, J. Ian Downes, Linda Dwoskin, Kate Ericsson, Thomas Johnson, Melissa Squire | Dechert LLP on 2/22/2013

In This Issue: - Supreme Court to Address “Changing Clothes” under the FLSA - First Appellate Court Decision on FLSA’s Nursing Mother Provision - Courts Continue Trend in Favor of Class Waivers in Arbitration...more

U.S. Supreme Court Again Takes on FLSA Donning and Doffing

by Danuta Bembenista Panich | Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,... on 2/21/2013

Unionized employers whose employees must wear protective equipment may soon receive direction on whether they must pay for time spent donning and doffing the gear. On February 19, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court granted review...more

Supreme Court To Resolve What Counts As 'Clothes' Under FLSA

by Michael Cardman | XpertHR - Partnered with LexisNexis on 2/20/2013

May an employer avoid paying a unionized employee for time spent putting on and taking off certain protective gear, such as safety glasses and ear plugs? What about ordinary clothing with special safety features, such as...more

Despite Possible OHSA Charges, Employer’s Appeal Of MOL Inspector’s Order May Proceed

by Adrian Miedema | Dentons on 2/14/2013

An employer’s appeal of a Ministry of Labour inspector’s compliance orders may proceed, despite the inspector’s ongoing investigation into possible charges, the Ontario Labour Relations Board has ruled....more

7 Results

| Page: of 1 | WORKING...

View per page

Home

Legal News

Find a Lawyer

Browse Subjects

Subscribe

Pro Services

For Reporters

Protective Gear

Ohio Supreme Court Offers Clarification of Employment Intentional Tort Statute

Under FLSA Section 203(o) Does the Term "Changing Clothes" Include the Time a Manufacturing Employee Spends Putting On and Taking...

As Supreme Court Defines “Clothes,” Biggest Impact Will Be on Judiciary’s Deference to DOL [Video]

February 2013 U.S. Labor and Employment Update

U.S. Supreme Court Again Takes on FLSA Donning and Doffing

Supreme Court To Resolve What Counts As 'Clothes' Under FLSA

Despite Possible OHSA Charges, Employer’s Appeal Of MOL Inspector’s Order May Proceed

As Supreme Court Defines “Clothes,” Biggest Impact Will Be on Judiciary’s Deference to DOL [Video]

Expand Your Reach