News & Analysis as of

Mobile Devices › Employment Litigation

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP

On-Call Time Not Compensable if Employee Not Restricted

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP on

In the days before cellphones, employees required to remain on-call for work were generally entitled to compensation for time spent at home waiting for the landline to ring. Given the ubiquity of mobile communication...more

Goodwin

Unlocking AI’s Power to Multiply Manufacturing Productivity

Goodwin on

To capture AI’s promise, manufacturers must take steps to protect privacy and root out bias, particularly when they train their systems on data about employees. ...more

Poyner Spruill LLP

“It’s Not My Phone” May Be No Better an Excuse Than “My Dog Ate My Homework”

Poyner Spruill LLP on

Texting in the course and scope of business communications is almost ubiquitous.  If your company issued a phone to an employee, presumably your company has the ability to control and preserve text messages sent on it. ...more

Butler Snow LLP

Warning: No Fishing Allowed! – Pt. 2: No, They Can’t Catch Cell Phones Either

Butler Snow LLP on

Previously, we analyzed the proper scope for discovery requests that asked for employee drug and alcohol test results.  In this article, we analyze a far more potent discovery substance—cell phone data....more

Butler Snow LLP

What’s Mine is Mine, and What’s Yours is (Not) Mine . . .

Butler Snow LLP on

The Tennessee Business Court, now in Phase II of the Pilot Project continues to deal with interesting and contemporary issues. In Universal Strategy Group v. Halstead, Case No. 16-15-BC, Chancellor Lyle held, after a bench...more

5 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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 Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide