Laws & Regulations

Subscribe to Laws & Regulations via RSS

Employers like predictability. And it would make sense that, for an employee who previously worked remotely, well, remote work should be a reasonable accommodation. But a recent case warns employers not to jump to that conclusion so quickly.Continue Reading Just Because It Worked Before Doesn’t Make It a Reasonable Accommodation Now…

So, in my first week of work at my current law firm, I discovered I was pregnant. Obviously, the timing wasn’t great. And frankly, I was terrified to tell my new bosses that, gosh, in about 8 months, I would need parental leave. (And by the way, the only other female attorney at that time was also pregnant, and due around the same time). But when I finally did, the partners (including the other pregnant attorney) were all incredibly supportive. Which is one of the reasons why, after many years, I’m still here. Continue Reading But The Applicant Didn’t Tell Me They Were Disabled…

As the federal court said, “This is a case about a dental appointment in Qatar, an international romance, national security, and a once-in-a-lifetime pandemic. It is also a case about Title VII.” (Really, I could not come up with a better lede myself). And so begins the latest entry in our sporadic series of extreme cases of bad workplace judgment.Continue Reading Extraordinary Workplace Misconduct: With this drill, I thee wed…?

The Olympics are coming! And there were two interesting Olympic-related articles in the New York Times yesterday involving star competitors who “withdrew” (voluntarily?) from their countries’ teams based on some bad behavior. One involved a gold-medal winning equestrienne who was filmed repeatedly whipping a horse, which she characterized as an “error in judgment.” (Um, hitting a horse 24 times in less than a minute – People Magazine had more of the salacious details – seems rather more than a simple error in judgment…). Her decision not to compete makes sense. The other involved the teenaged captain of the Japanese women’s gymnastics team who committed the unspeakable crime of … smoking a cigarette and drinking alcohol. Twice. I’ve gotta say, forcing her to withdraw from the Olympics over common teenaged conduct (even if it is illegal under Japanese law for those under age 20) seems excessively harsh (and undoubtedly devastating to a young woman who likely has spent her entire life training for this opportunity). And there’s a lesson there for employers about imposing discipline. Continue Reading Hey Employers – Let the Punishment Fit the Crime

On July 10, 2024, the Maryland Department of Labor’s (MDOL) issued a second version of “draft” regulations to implement Maryland’s paid family and medical leave insurance (FAMLI) law. Applicable to all employers with Maryland employees and starting July 1, 2026, the FAMLI law will provide most employees in Maryland with 12 weeks of paid family and medical leave, with the possibility of an additional 12 weeks of paid parental leave, as we have previously detailed in our E-lerts from April 12, 2023 and April 12, 2022. The MDOL issued a first draft of the regulations earlier this year, and we discussed the items of interest or significance in a January 30, 2024 E-lert. Subsequently, amendments to the FAMLI law were made during the 2024 General Assembly session (which we covered in our April 10, 2024 E-lert). And now we highlight the more significant developments in the latest version of the draft regulations. For more, click here.Continue Reading Round Two of Maryland’s “Draft” FAMLI Regulations – What Do They Say?

On July 3, 2024, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas issued a preliminary injunction against the Federal Trade Commission’s (“FTC”) “Non-Compete Rule.” As we discussed in our April 24, 2024 E-Lert, on April 23, 2024, the FTC issued the Non-Compete Rule, banning nearly all non-compete provisions between employers and employees. Two of the five FTC Commissioners voted against issuing the Non-Compete Rule and offered dissenting views as to why the Commission should not have issued the Rule. Almost immediately, litigation was commenced by private parties to block the Non-Compete Rule from coming into effect on September 5, 2024.Continue Reading Another Day, Another Limited Preliminary Injunction – This Time on the FTC’s Non-Compete Ban

On June 28, 2024, the Supreme Court overruled its 1984 Chevron decision, which required federal courts to defer to administrative agencies’ interpretations of ambiguous statutes. Under the new rule, announced in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, courts reviewing an agency action must independently decide whether an agency’s interpretation of an ambiguous statute is correct. However, when a statute delegates discretionary authority to an agency, courts must respect that delegation, while making sure that the agency acts within its delegated authority. The Loper Bright decision is a big win for businesses and other organizations who believe that federal agencies – including workplace agencies like the Department of Labor, the National Labor Relations Board, and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission – have too much power.Continue Reading U.S. Supreme Court Undermines Federal Agency Authority, With Impact on the Workplace

In Starbucks Corp. v. McKinney, the Supreme Court held that a more stringent test applied to lawsuits filed by the National Labor Relations Board (the “Board”) that seek injunctions to halt serious labor violations.  While the decision directs district courts to adopt the tightened standard, several circuits, including the Fourth Circuit, have already been consistently applying the higher standard.   Continue Reading NLRB Injunctions Are Now More Difficult to Obtain, At Least in Some Jurisdictions

As most employers (hopefully) know, the U.S. Department of Labor issued a final rule that will significantly increase the salary threshold for the exemptions from the Fair Labor Standard Act’s minimum wage and overtime requirements, as discussed in our April 24, 2024 E-lert. Consistent with the now-standard practice in response to pretty much any regulation issued by any federal workforce agency, three lawsuits have been filed to enjoin the rule from taking effect on the scheduled date of July 1, 2024. In Texas, of course. Because those Texas federal courts have been notoriously unfriendly to federal agency actions. But those three lawsuits are pending before three different judges…Continue Reading Three Overtime Rule Lawsuits, Three Judges – What Now?

Many companies treat the annual EEO-1 filing requirement with, let’s say, some lack of urgency and, historically, there has been little to no consequence for failing to file the EEO-1 form. But a recent press release from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission makes clear that those days may be over, as the agency announced that it has filed suit against fifteen companies across a wide range of industries for failing to file those mandatory reports in 2021 and 2022! Continue Reading Wait – the EEOC Is Really Serious About the EEO-1 Filing Requirement!