Court is in Session: Three Employment Law Cases Before the Supreme Court to Watch This Term

by Orrick - Global Employment Law Group

The United States Supreme Court is now in session and three cases stand out on the docket that private employers will want to follow. While not the blockbusters heard during the Court’s last session, these cases will address important issues ranging from the proper interpretation of Sarbanes-Oxley Act’s whistleblower provision to the breadth of the President’s recess-appointment power to what constitutes “changing clothes” under the FLSA.

#1: Lawson v. FMR LLC (Fidelity Investments)

Lawson v. FMR LLC asks the Supreme Court to determine whether an employee of a privately-held contractor or subcontractor of a public company is protected from retaliation by Sarbanes-Oxley Act’s (“SOX”) whistleblower provision.

In a nutshell, Petitioners made repeated complaints regarding their employers’ practices to company executives and, for one Petitioner, to the Securities and Exchange Commission; each was thereafter subjected to adverse employment action. They contend that they are protected by Section 1514A of SOX which prohibits certain public companies and their contractors from retaliating against an “employee” who engages in protected activity. On the other hand, Respondents argue that the “employee[s]” protected from retaliation are limited to employees of public companies themselves, and do not include those who work for private contractors of a public company.

The district court found for the Petitioners, but was reversed by the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. If the interpretation urged by Petitioners is adopted, any employer doing business with a public company could potentially become covered by SOX’s whistleblower provision, a significant expansion of SOX. Lawson is set to be heard on November 12, 2013.

Orrick prepared the amicus brief in this case filed by the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA). To obtain a copy of that brief, or other briefs in the case, contact Mike Delikat.

#2: National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning

NLRB v. Noel Canning will explore the breath of the President’s constitutional recess-appointment power. At issue is whether the President’s recess-appointment power: (i) may be exercised during a recess that occurs within a Senate session or is limited to recesses that occur between Senate sessions; (ii) may be exercised to fill vacancies that exist during a recess or is limited to vacancies that first arose during that recess; and (iii) may be exercised when the Senate is convening in pro forma sessions.

During Senate pro forma sessions, President Obama invoked the Recess Appointments Clause (“Clause”) and appointed three new National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) members. Noel Canning contends that an order of the NLRB, so composed, is invalid because the appointments were not authorized by the Clause. The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia found that the appointments were not authorized because none of the NLRB vacancies had arisen during an inter-session recess and had been filled during that recess. On appeal, NLRB argues the Court of Appeals erred in its holding and further contests Noel Canning’s claim that the occurrence of pro forma sessions meant that the Senate was in session for the purposes of the Clause.

This case is noteworthy because if the President’s recess appointments are invalid, then the rulings of the NLRB between January 4, 2012 and July 30, 2013 in which these appointees have participated would be called into question. In the year between the disputed recess appointments and the D.C. Circuit’s opinion alone, the NLRB ruled on over 200 cases. One significant decision rendered during this period was New York Party Shuttle, LLC & Fred Pflantzer, 359 NLRB No. 112 (May 2, 2013), which held that an employee’s Facebook postings criticizing his employer constituted protected union organizing activities. Click here to read more on New York Party Shuttle, LLC & Fred Pflantzer. Argument in this case has not yet been scheduled.

#3: Sandifer v. United States Steel Corp.

Under Section 203(o) of the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), an employer need not compensate a worker for time spent “changing clothes” if that time is excluded from compensable time under a collective bargaining agreement. This case asks the Supreme Court to determine what constitutes “changing clothes.”

United States Steel Corporation (“U.S. Steel”) workers argue that donning and doffing mandatory safety wear does not constitute “changing clothes” within the meaning of FLSA § 203(o) because safety wear is not “clothes,” and therefore should be compensable time. The district court sided with U.S. Steel finding that such time is not compensable, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed. The Supreme Court will consider whether employers and employees in unionized industries will be permitted to negotiate on whether time spent changing into and out of protective gear is compensable and will determine how much deference to give the Department of Labor’s interpretation of changing clothes. The United States submitted an amicus curiae brief supporting U.S. Steel. The Supreme Court will hear argument on this issue on November 4, 2013.


DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Orrick - Global Employment Law Group | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Orrick - Global Employment Law Group

Orrick - Global Employment Law Group on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.


JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at:

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.