At Whiteford, our experience in labor and employment law allows us to help clients create a practical platform on which to base labor and employee relations decisions.
Labor & Employment Litigation
Every company is different. We look at corporate culture, history and character to understand the unique relationship between management and employees. Using this understanding, we provide labor and employment law advice and counsel tailored to achieve personnel objectives and avoid unnecessary litigation.
Should litigation arise, our labor and employment attorneys combine their experience in the intricacies of labor law, employment law, and litigation to give you the benefit of in-depth legal knowledge and proven courtroom technique.
Labor & Employment Law Experience
Our attorneys bring broad-based experience to the practice of labor and employment law. Our team includes attorneys formerly with the U.S. Department of Labor, along with those whose careers have been devoted to representing and counseling management in labor relations issues.
Our labor and employment law clients represent virtually every type of business and industry, ranging in size from Fortune 500 companies with thousands of employees in various locations, to small, closely held businesses and not-for-profits. We have also represented many state and local governmental entities in Maryland over the years in litigation, arbitration, contract negotiations, and advice and counsel on employment decisions.
Our experience includes union avoidance, union decertification, election campaigns, collective bargaining negotiations, grievance arbitration, employee handbooks and work rules, affirmative action, wage and hour disputes, occupational safety and health matters, advice and counsel on drafting effective personnel policies and procedures and handling employment discrimination cases. We spend considerable time training our clients and their supervisors on a host of employment related issues ranging from how to properly interview and hire the best applicants, provide appropriate benefits and compensation, manage and where necessary discipline their employees, provide a safe workplace free from harassment or other improper conduct, and how supervisors can more effectively manage their employees.
Our labor and employment law section conducts litigation of representation matters and unfair labor practice charges (offensive and defensive) before the National Labor Relations Board and the Federal Courts of Appeal. We also litigate employment related cases involving claims of discrimination, wrongful discharge, health and safety, whistleblowers and other claims brought by employees against employers in state and federal courts, state and federal administrative agencies and Boards throughout the Mid-Atlantic region. We are admitted to practice in Maryland, D.C., Virginia and New York. Members of this legal section also have extensive experience in immigration matters as it relates to employment and labor laws.
On July 23, 2026, the EEOC issued a proposed rule to rescind and remove the regulation that currently requires employers of over 100 employees, and most Federal contractors with at least 50 employees, to file an annual demographic job-category report (the “EEO-1”) identifying employer workforces by race, gender and ethnicity. The Federal Register proposal summary explains: the EEOC “has preliminarily determined that the reports are inconsistent with equal employment opportunity law and potentially unconstitutional. It further finds the data collected is not narrowly tailored, is unnecessary to enforce anti-discrimination laws, and at a minimum, that any marginal benefits are outweighed by the substantial burdens imposed on employers . . . regardless of any specific allegations or indication of potential violation [of law].”
Virginia employers may soon receive important guidance on the scope of the Commonwealth's restrictions on restrictive covenant agreements. In Sentry Force Security, LLC v. Barrera, the Supreme Court of Virginia has been asked to review an unpublished Court of Appeals decision holding that Virginia Code § 40.1-28.7:8 may prohibit employee non-solicitation provisions for covered employees.
On August 21, 2026, the U.S. Department of Labor published three final rules that collectively dismantle or significantly curtail longstanding affirmative action obligations for federal contractors, marking a decisive step in the current administration's broader campaign to overhaul federal equal employment opportunity enforcement.
Following in the wake of the US Supreme Court decision upholding the Administration’s right to terminate Temporary Protected Status programs for both Haitian and Syrian nationals, the US Citizenship & Immigration Service has moved quickly to send out notices of the end dates for the TPS designation for multiple countries. For example, USCIS notified employers that the TPS designation for Syria and Haiti was terminated effective July 27, 2026. The impact for Haitian nationals with TPS status is immediate, effectively terminating all work authorization for those individuals.
On August 5, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued an opinion in Dieng v. Orkin, LLC, vacating a lower court’s ruling finding that unpaid leave was a reasonable accommodation for a permanent disability.
On August 5, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued an opinion in Dieng v. Orkin, LLC, vacating a lower court’s ruling finding that unpaid leave was a reasonable accommodation for a permanent disability.
A newly published opinion letter by the Department of Labor has clarified whether employers must pay their hourly employees for time spent commuting between home and work when the employee performs work tasks before leaving home in the morning or after returning home in the evening. According to the DOL, such time will generally be non-compensable: a conclusion that provides greater reassurance to employers considering arrangements under which employees would perform work at home and in the office on the same workday.
A newly published opinion letter by the Department of Labor has clarified whether employers must pay their hourly employees for time spent commuting between home and work when the employee performs work tasks before leaving home in the morning or after returning home in the evening. According to the DOL, such time will generally be non-compensable: a conclusion that provides greater reassurance to employers considering arrangements under which employees would perform work at home and in the office on the same workday.
Thinking about pulling the plug on your company’s profit-sharing plan? You’re not alone—it’s one of the most common questions we receive. The good news: it’s entirely doable. The key is understanding that termination isn’t a single event but a process that requires formal employer action and a complete plan wind-up. While you may have heard of Form 5310, that IRS filing is optional and doesn’t actually terminate the plan itself.
Thinking about pulling the plug on your company’s profit-sharing plan? You’re not alone—it’s one of the most common questions we receive. The good news: it’s entirely doable. The key is understanding that termination isn’t a single event but a process that requires formal employer action and a complete plan wind-up. While you may have heard of Form 5310, that IRS filing is optional and doesn’t actually terminate the plan itself.
Marlo Spaeth has Down syndrome. She worked at Walmart for 16 years, until a computerized scheduling system shifted her hours by 90 minutes. Her disability prevented her from adapting. She requested her prior schedule as a reasonable accommodation for her disability. Her employer refused, without engaging in the interactive process required under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and fired her.
Marlo Spaeth has Down syndrome. She worked at Walmart for 16 years, until a computerized scheduling system shifted her hours by 90 minutes. Her disability prevented her from adapting. She requested her prior schedule as a reasonable accommodation for her disability. Her employer refused, without engaging in the interactive process required under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and fired her.
New York City’s final Earned Safe and Sick Time Act (“ESSTA”) rules will take effect July 23, 2026, and every New York City employer, regardless of size, faces fines of $500 per employee per year for non-compliance, plus forced restoration of all accrued and mandated hours.
New York City’s final Earned Safe and Sick Time Act (“ESSTA”) rules will take effect July 23, 2026, and every New York City employer, regardless of size, faces fines of $500 per employee per year for non-compliance, plus forced restoration of all accrued and mandated hours.
As of July 1, 2026, several new Virginia employment laws are in effect. These changes impact hiring practices, employee agreements, wage and hour rules, and more.
As of July 1, 2026, several new Virginia employment laws are in effect. These changes impact hiring practices, employee agreements, wage and hour rules, and more.
On June 30, 2026, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) announced that it has formally withdrawn longstanding guidance documents on the permissible scope of voluntary affirmative action programs under federal law. The EEOC’s Republican majority determined that these guidance materials, some dating back more than four decades, could not be reconciled with the statutory text of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or with current Supreme Court jurisprudence.
On June 30, 2026, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) announced that it has formally withdrawn longstanding guidance documents on the permissible scope of voluntary affirmative action programs under federal law. The EEOC’s Republican majority determined that these guidance materials, some dating back more than four decades, could not be reconciled with the statutory text of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 or with current Supreme Court jurisprudence.
On March 16, 2026, ICE updated its Form I-9 Inspection fact sheet by recategorizing numerous I-9 form errors to expand the number of violations that may result in fines. The change – made without any notice or rulemaking effort – marks a significant change in I-9 enforcement policy and significantly increases the potential for large fines and penalties for employers, for even minor and easily correctable errors on their I-9 forms.
On March 16, 2026, ICE updated its Form I-9 Inspection fact sheet by recategorizing numerous I-9 form errors to expand the number of violations that may result in fines. The change – made without any notice or rulemaking effort – marks a significant change in I-9 enforcement policy and significantly increases the potential for large fines and penalties for employers, for even minor and easily correctable errors on their I-9 forms.
Since 2020, Virginia has prohibited employers from having non-compete agreements with “low wage employees” who earn below the average weekly wage in Virginia. Last year, the Virginia General Assembly amended the “low wage employee” definition to include non-exempt employees entitled to overtime compensation for hours worked more than forty hours a week. On July 1, 2026, two new restrictions will take effect.
Since 2020, Virginia has prohibited employers from having non-compete agreements with “low wage employees” who earn below the average weekly wage in Virginia. Last year, the Virginia General Assembly amended the “low wage employee” definition to include non-exempt employees entitled to overtime compensation for hours worked more than forty hours a week. On July 1, 2026, two new restrictions will take effect.
For the first time in several months, the U.S. Department of Labor has published a new set of opinion letters. Among the issues addressed was an employer’s process for rounding time entries made by employees at the beginning and end of their shifts.
For the first time in several months, the U.S. Department of Labor has published a new set of opinion letters. Among the issues addressed was an employer’s process for rounding time entries made by employees at the beginning and end of their shifts.
The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) has a new idea for an old question: who, exactly, is your boss? In a proposed rule unveiled on April 22, 2026, the DOL would set a single “joint-employer” test for the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), and the Migrant & Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act (MSPA), unlike the 2020 Joint Employer Rule. The DOL aims to provide employers with a consistent understanding of when multiple employers are jointly responsible for protecting employee wages, leaves of absence, and other federal rights of an employee. This proposed rule would particularly impact businesses and organizations with contractors, as well as staffing agencies, franchisors, and other business models and platforms with shared oversight and control over workers.
The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) has a new idea for an old question: who, exactly, is your boss? In a proposed rule unveiled on April 22, 2026, the DOL would set a single “joint-employer” test for the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), and the Migrant & Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act (MSPA), unlike the 2020 Joint Employer Rule. The DOL aims to provide employers with a consistent understanding of when multiple employers are jointly responsible for protecting employee wages, leaves of absence, and other federal rights of an employee. This proposed rule would particularly impact businesses and organizations with contractors, as well as staffing agencies, franchisors, and other business models and platforms with shared oversight and control over workers.
According to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC) most recent published annual reporting, claims for disability-related discrimination (38%) outpaced race (34%) and sex (26%) related filings. Indeed, in the three past reporting years, the number of charges filed claiming disability-related discrimination increased by 34% (25,004 to 33,668), more than in any other filing category.
According to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC) most recent published annual reporting, claims for disability-related discrimination (38%) outpaced race (34%) and sex (26%) related filings. Indeed, in the three past reporting years, the number of charges filed claiming disability-related discrimination increased by 34% (25,004 to 33,668), more than in any other filing category.
Virginia employers take note of an important legislative development that will impact your hiring practices. Effective July 1, 2026, Senate Bill 215 (SB 215) amends the Virginia Wage Payment Act, and it introduces significant changes to how employers must handle compensation matters during the hiring process. Below is a summary of the key provisions and recommended steps for compliance.
Virginia employers take note of an important legislative development that will impact your hiring practices. Effective July 1, 2026, Senate Bill 215 (SB 215) amends the Virginia Wage Payment Act, and it introduces significant changes to how employers must handle compensation matters during the hiring process. Below is a summary of the key provisions and recommended steps for compliance.
On April 22, 2026, Virginia enacted a paid family and medical leave law after the Virginia General Assembly accepted Governor Spanberger’s amendments. The program will be administered by the Virginia Employment Commission (“VEC”) and funded through a shared payroll contribution from both employers and employees.
On April 22, 2026, Virginia enacted a paid family and medical leave law after the Virginia General Assembly accepted Governor Spanberger’s amendments. The program will be administered by the Virginia Employment Commission (“VEC”) and funded through a shared payroll contribution from both employers and employees.
Five years after the rollout of the COVID-19 vaccines, cases involving religious objections to employers’ vaccination requirements are now reaching the federal appellate courts. In the latest round, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in Detweiler v. Mid-Columbia Medical Center, et al., the full court recently turned away a request for rehearing in a case turning on the burden, if any, an employee has to demonstrate the religious basis of their objection to an employer’s work requirements.
Five years after the rollout of the COVID-19 vaccines, cases involving religious objections to employers’ vaccination requirements are now reaching the federal appellate courts. In the latest round, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in Detweiler v. Mid-Columbia Medical Center, et al., the full court recently turned away a request for rehearing in a case turning on the burden, if any, an employee has to demonstrate the religious basis of their objection to an employer’s work requirements.
In April 2024, the U.S. Department of Justice issued a final rule updating its regulations for Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) to specifically require that state and local government websites, mobile applications and other digital tools be accessible to individuals with disabilities. Public colleges and universities are now entering a decisive two-year window for compliance with the U.S. Department of Justice’s final rule.
In April 2024, the U.S. Department of Justice issued a final rule updating its regulations for Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) to specifically require that state and local government websites, mobile applications and other digital tools be accessible to individuals with disabilities. Public colleges and universities are now entering a decisive two-year window for compliance with the U.S. Department of Justice’s final rule.
On March 26, 2026, President Trump signed a new Executive Order titled “Addressing DEI Discrimination by Federal Contractors,” representing a significant escalation in the administration’s campaign against diversity, equity, and inclusion programs. The order requires all federal agencies to include, within 30 days, a new mandatory clause in all contracts and subcontracts under which contractors must agree not to engage in “racially discriminatory DEI activities.”
On March 26, 2026, President Trump signed a new Executive Order titled “Addressing DEI Discrimination by Federal Contractors,” representing a significant escalation in the administration’s campaign against diversity, equity, and inclusion programs. The order requires all federal agencies to include, within 30 days, a new mandatory clause in all contracts and subcontracts under which contractors must agree not to engage in “racially discriminatory DEI activities.”
Last month, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission issued guidance titled “Frequently Asked Questions from the Federal Sector about Telework Accommodations for Disabilities.” While it is targeted toward federal agencies, the guidance draws on standards also relevant to private employers covered under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
Last month, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission issued guidance titled “Frequently Asked Questions from the Federal Sector about Telework Accommodations for Disabilities.” While it is targeted toward federal agencies, the guidance draws on standards also relevant to private employers covered under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
The federal statutes prohibiting employment discrimination – such as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act – establish specific time periods during which employees must act to timely pursue a claim. In a recent decision, the Fourth Circuit (which encompasses Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia and West Virginia) considered whether an employer and employee could lawfully enter into an agreement that shortens the time in which an employee must file such a claim. The Court concluded that such agreements are not permissible and are contrary to the statutory framework governing claims for discrimination.
The federal statutes prohibiting employment discrimination – such as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act – establish specific time periods during which employees must act to timely pursue a claim. In a recent decision, the Fourth Circuit (which encompasses Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia and West Virginia) considered whether an employer and employee could lawfully enter into an agreement that shortens the time in which an employee must file such a claim. The Court concluded that such agreements are not permissible and are contrary to the statutory framework governing claims for discrimination.
The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) just threw a lifeline to organizations that use independent contractors. On February 27, 2026, the DOL published a proposed, employer-friendly rule that would dramatically simplify how businesses and nonprofit organizations classify workers as independent contractors under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The proposed DOL rule scraps the Biden administration’s 2024 rule that was criticized as an ambiguous and difficult-to-interpret standard for determining independent contractor status.
The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) just threw a lifeline to organizations that use independent contractors. On February 27, 2026, the DOL published a proposed, employer-friendly rule that would dramatically simplify how businesses and nonprofit organizations classify workers as independent contractors under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The proposed DOL rule scraps the Biden administration’s 2024 rule that was criticized as an ambiguous and difficult-to-interpret standard for determining independent contractor status.
New York employers who do not offer a retirement plan are about to face a new compliance obligation. The New York Secure Choice Savings Program requires covered private-sector employers to automatically enroll their employees in a state-facilitated Roth IRA through payroll deduction. With the first compliance deadline arriving on March 16, 2026, employers should assess their obligations now. New York joins a growing list of states that mandate retirement savings plans: California (CalSavers), Colorado (SecureSavings), Connecticut (MyCTSavings), Delaware (Delaware EARNS), Illinois (Secure Choice), Maine (MERIT), Maryland (MarylandSaves), New Jersey (Secure Choice), Oregon (OregonSaves), Vermont (VT Saves), and Virginia (RetirePathVA).
New York employers who do not offer a retirement plan are about to face a new compliance obligation. The New York Secure Choice Savings Program requires covered private-sector employers to automatically enroll their employees in a state-facilitated Roth IRA through payroll deduction. With the first compliance deadline arriving on March 16, 2026, employers should assess their obligations now. New York joins a growing list of states that mandate retirement savings plans: California (CalSavers), Colorado (SecureSavings), Connecticut (MyCTSavings), Delaware (Delaware EARNS), Illinois (Secure Choice), Maine (MERIT), Maryland (MarylandSaves), New Jersey (Secure Choice), Oregon (OregonSaves), Vermont (VT Saves), and Virginia (RetirePathVA).
In an Opinion Letter issued on January 5, 2026 (FMLA2026-2), the Department of Labor (DOL) clarified that time spent away from employment for travel to and from medical appointments is protected under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). This protection also extends to travel arising when, for example, an individual transports a family member for medical or dental care during the workday.
In an Opinion Letter issued on January 5, 2026 (FMLA2026-2), the Department of Labor (DOL) clarified that time spent away from employment for travel to and from medical appointments is protected under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). This protection also extends to travel arising when, for example, an individual transports a family member for medical or dental care during the workday.
Virginia employers may be facing the most significant overhaul of workplace laws in decades. With unified Democratic control of the executive branch and General Assembly, lawmakers have reintroduced numerous previously vetoed proposals and advanced new legislation that could reshape the employment litigation landscape. From leave entitlements, wage transparency, noncompete issues, and artificial intelligence regulation, employers should prepare for substantial shifts in workplace compliance obligations. Below are bills employers should track:
Virginia employers may be facing the most significant overhaul of workplace laws in decades. With unified Democratic control of the executive branch and General Assembly, lawmakers have reintroduced numerous previously vetoed proposals and advanced new legislation that could reshape the employment litigation landscape. From leave entitlements, wage transparency, noncompete issues, and artificial intelligence regulation, employers should prepare for substantial shifts in workplace compliance obligations. Below are bills employers should track:
On February 6, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued a significant ruling in National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education v. Trump, vacating a preliminary injunction that had blocked key provisions of President Trump's Executive Orders (EOs) targeting diversity, equity, and inclusion programs. In its decision, the three-judge panel concluded that the EOs, which direct federal agencies to terminate "equity-related" grants and contracts and require federal contractors and grant recipients to certify compliance with anti-discrimination laws, are likely constitutional and do not impermissibly chill protected speech. Chief Judge Albert Diaz wrote that "President Trump has decided that equity isn't a priority in his administration and so has directed his subordinates to terminate funding that supports equity-related projects to the maximum extent allowed by law," adding that "[w]hether that's sound policy or not isn't our call."
On February 6, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued a significant ruling in National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education v. Trump, vacating a preliminary injunction that had blocked key provisions of President Trump's Executive Orders (EOs) targeting diversity, equity, and inclusion programs. In its decision, the three-judge panel concluded that the EOs, which direct federal agencies to terminate "equity-related" grants and contracts and require federal contractors and grant recipients to certify compliance with anti-discrimination laws, are likely constitutional and do not impermissibly chill protected speech. Chief Judge Albert Diaz wrote that "President Trump has decided that equity isn't a priority in his administration and so has directed his subordinates to terminate funding that supports equity-related projects to the maximum extent allowed by law," adding that "[w]hether that's sound policy or not isn't our call."
As we detailed in our prior Client Alert, on October 25, 2025, New York City enacted substantial amendments to the Earned Safe and Sick Time Act ("ESSTA") in the bill known as Int. 780-A. The law takes effect on February 22, 2026, just days away. The NYC Department of Consumer and Worker Protection ("DCWP") is simultaneously proposing new implementing rules, with a public hearing scheduled for March 2, 2026, and written comments due by that same date.
If your organization employs workers in New York City, your current sick leave policies are almost certainly out of compliance. Here's what you need to know now.
As we detailed in our prior Client Alert, on October 25, 2025, New York City enacted substantial amendments to the Earned Safe and Sick Time Act ("ESSTA") in the bill known as Int. 780-A. The law takes effect on February 22, 2026, just days away. The NYC Department of Consumer and Worker Protection ("DCWP") is simultaneously proposing new implementing rules, with a public hearing scheduled for March 2, 2026, and written comments due by that same date.
If your organization employs workers in New York City, your current sick leave policies are almost certainly out of compliance. Here's what you need to know now.
The registration process for the FY2027 H-1B visa lottery opens on March 4, 2026. Employers should start planning now if they are interested in registering a current employee or potential hire for the lottery.
The registration process for the FY2027 H-1B visa lottery opens on March 4, 2026. Employers should start planning now if they are interested in registering a current employee or potential hire for the lottery.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit recently issued a decision in Haggins v. Wilson Air Center, LLC that offers valuable guidance for employers navigating disability accommodation requests, particularly those involving remote work arrangements. In its January 14, 2026, ruling, the Court affirmed summary judgment in favor of the employer, holding that an employee who repeatedly failed to report to work or communicate her absences was not a “qualified individual” entitled to protection under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit recently issued a decision in Haggins v. Wilson Air Center, LLC that offers valuable guidance for employers navigating disability accommodation requests, particularly those involving remote work arrangements. In its January 14, 2026, ruling, the Court affirmed summary judgment in favor of the employer, holding that an employee who repeatedly failed to report to work or communicate her absences was not a “qualified individual” entitled to protection under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
The Department of Labor (DOL) started off 2026 issuing numerous Opinion Letters on issues arising under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Opinion Letter FLSA2026-4 addresses questions regarding the overtime exemption applicable to retail and service employees.
The Department of Labor (DOL) started off 2026 issuing numerous Opinion Letters on issues arising under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Opinion Letter FLSA2026-4 addresses questions regarding the overtime exemption applicable to retail and service employees.
Since the late 1980s, employers conducting large layoffs have had to seek to ensure compliance with the Worker Adjustment and Training Notification Act (WARN). WARN requires that covered employers – those with at least 100 employees – provide sixty days’ advance notice prior to implementing a plant closing or mass layoff. WARN defines a “plant closing” as a shutdown of a single site of employment or an operating unit within a single site that affects at least 50 employees.
Since the late 1980s, employers conducting large layoffs have had to seek to ensure compliance with the Worker Adjustment and Training Notification Act (WARN). WARN requires that covered employers – those with at least 100 employees – provide sixty days’ advance notice prior to implementing a plant closing or mass layoff. WARN defines a “plant closing” as a shutdown of a single site of employment or an operating unit within a single site that affects at least 50 employees.
On December 4, 2025, the New York City Council overrode Mayor Eric Adams’ veto, enacting two laws that amend NYC’s Administrative Code, to establish a pay data reporting mandate for private-sector employers with 200+ employees working in New York City (Int. 982-A) in order to improve wage transparency and a City-led annual pay equity study using employer-submitted data (Int. 984-A). While both laws took effect immediately, employer filing obligations begin only after New York City designates the implementing agency, issues a standardized reporting form and sets a filing schedule by rule.
On December 4, 2025, the New York City Council overrode Mayor Eric Adams’ veto, enacting two laws that amend NYC’s Administrative Code, to establish a pay data reporting mandate for private-sector employers with 200+ employees working in New York City (Int. 982-A) in order to improve wage transparency and a City-led annual pay equity study using employer-submitted data (Int. 984-A). While both laws took effect immediately, employer filing obligations begin only after New York City designates the implementing agency, issues a standardized reporting form and sets a filing schedule by rule.
Holiday-season anti-harassment trainings can backfire. A recent Second Circuit (which covers New York, Vermont and Connecticut) decision underscores that when workplace training content crosses the line into essentialist, accusatory, or segregating themes—and complaints are ignored—employers can potentially face legal liability for creating a hostile work environment.
Holiday-season anti-harassment trainings can backfire. A recent Second Circuit (which covers New York, Vermont and Connecticut) decision underscores that when workplace training content crosses the line into essentialist, accusatory, or segregating themes—and complaints are ignored—employers can potentially face legal liability for creating a hostile work environment.
New York State now prohibits employers from using training repayment arrangements and using a job applicant’s credit history in making hiring or compensation decisions.
More specifically, on Friday, December 19, 2025, New York Governor Kathy Hochul signed into law two bills aimed at protecting workers: 1) New York State Assembly Bill A584 entitled the Trapped at Work Act which prohibits mandatory “Training Repayment Agreement Provisions” in employment agreements or offer letters; and 2) New York State Senate Bill S3072 which restricts employers from accessing a worker’s credit report while making decisions about hiring or compensation.
New York State now prohibits employers from using training repayment arrangements and using a job applicant’s credit history in making hiring or compensation decisions.
More specifically, on Friday, December 19, 2025, New York Governor Kathy Hochul signed into law two bills aimed at protecting workers: 1) New York State Assembly Bill A584 entitled the Trapped at Work Act which prohibits mandatory “Training Repayment Agreement Provisions” in employment agreements or offer letters; and 2) New York State Senate Bill S3072 which restricts employers from accessing a worker’s credit report while making decisions about hiring or compensation.
If your job descriptions are collecting dust, they are not protecting your business—or your people. As roles evolve throughout the year, a quick annual tune-up can prevent headaches ranging from wage-and-hour exposure to ADA missteps. Year-end is a natural moment to align the description with what is happening in your business.
If your job descriptions are collecting dust, they are not protecting your business—or your people. As roles evolve throughout the year, a quick annual tune-up can prevent headaches ranging from wage-and-hour exposure to ADA missteps. Year-end is a natural moment to align the description with what is happening in your business.
On November 19, 2025, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission issued an advisory Guidance titled “Discrimination Against American Workers is Against the Law.” The new Guidance emphasizes that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which protects employees or applicants from discrimination based upon national origin, includes and protects individuals who are natural-born or otherwise identify as “Americans.”
On November 19, 2025, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission issued an advisory Guidance titled “Discrimination Against American Workers is Against the Law.” The new Guidance emphasizes that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which protects employees or applicants from discrimination based upon national origin, includes and protects individuals who are natural-born or otherwise identify as “Americans.”
In an early October Employment Law Update, we advised that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), Department of Labor (DOL), and National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) had largely ceased operations due to the federal shutdown, with wide-ranging effects on investigations, union elections, and employer-facing services.
In an early October Employment Law Update, we advised that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), Department of Labor (DOL), and National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) had largely ceased operations due to the federal shutdown, with wide-ranging effects on investigations, union elections, and employer-facing services.
In our October 30 Employment Law Update, we addressed the Department of Labor’s announcement of its program to step up audits of employers participating in the H-1B program.
In our October 30 Employment Law Update, we addressed the Department of Labor’s announcement of its program to step up audits of employers participating in the H-1B program.
Q: What happened? On October 25, 2025, New York City enacted Int. 780-A, amending New York City’s Earned Safe and Sick Time Act (“ESSTA” or “Sick/Safe Leave Law”) and aligning it with New York City's Temporary Schedule Change Act (TSCA). The law expands the permissible uses of ESSTA leave, adds a new front-loaded allotment of unpaid safe/sick time, clarifies documentation, confidentiality, and pay-statement rules, and restructures TSCA so employees retain the right to request temporary schedule changes but no longer have two guaranteed TSCA days.[1]
Q: What happened? On October 25, 2025, New York City enacted Int. 780-A, amending New York City’s Earned Safe and Sick Time Act (“ESSTA” or “Sick/Safe Leave Law”) and aligning it with New York City's Temporary Schedule Change Act (TSCA). The law expands the permissible uses of ESSTA leave, adds a new front-loaded allotment of unpaid safe/sick time, clarifies documentation, confidentiality, and pay-statement rules, and restructures TSCA so employees retain the right to request temporary schedule changes but no longer have two guaranteed TSCA days.[1]
On September 19, 2025, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) announced Project Firewall. This initiative reflects a strengthening of investigative efforts to ensure employer compliance with their obligations under the H-1B visa program.
On September 19, 2025, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) announced Project Firewall. This initiative reflects a strengthening of investigative efforts to ensure employer compliance with their obligations under the H-1B visa program.
With the passage of the Time to Care Act in 2022, Maryland’s General Assembly set the stage for the state’s implementation of a paid family and medical leave program. Employees who need to miss work for a qualifying reason will be able to submit a claim for benefits and recoup a portion of the wages they would have otherwise earned but for the covered leave. The path to the program’s implementation has been a rocky one, with three delays in the timetable for when benefits will become available to employees. As of this writing, payroll tax contributions to fund the program are set to commence on January 1, 2027, with benefits for employees becoming available on January 3, 2028.
With the passage of the Time to Care Act in 2022, Maryland’s General Assembly set the stage for the state’s implementation of a paid family and medical leave program. Employees who need to miss work for a qualifying reason will be able to submit a claim for benefits and recoup a portion of the wages they would have otherwise earned but for the covered leave. The path to the program’s implementation has been a rocky one, with three delays in the timetable for when benefits will become available to employees. As of this writing, payroll tax contributions to fund the program are set to commence on January 1, 2027, with benefits for employees becoming available on January 3, 2028.
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (“EEOC”) posture has shifted, and employers should take note. With the recent confirmation of a second Republican EEOC commissioner – Brittany Panuccio – the EEOC has a quorum on its 5-seat panel, with a 2–1 Republican majority. With the quorum restored, the EEOC can alter policy, guidance, strategic plans, and litigation priorities.
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (“EEOC”) posture has shifted, and employers should take note. With the recent confirmation of a second Republican EEOC commissioner – Brittany Panuccio – the EEOC has a quorum on its 5-seat panel, with a 2–1 Republican majority. With the quorum restored, the EEOC can alter policy, guidance, strategic plans, and litigation priorities.
The primary federal agencies regulating employment, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the Department of Labor (DOL), and the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), are all funded by federal appropriations and have largely ceased most employer-involved activities.
The primary federal agencies regulating employment, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the Department of Labor (DOL), and the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), are all funded by federal appropriations and have largely ceased most employer-involved activities.
When budgets tighten — whether due to a federal government shutdown, grant cuts, manufacturing slowdowns, or a dip in tourism — some employers face the difficult decision to reduce staff. If layoffs are on the table, approach them with empathy, clarity, and legal diligence.
When budgets tighten — whether due to a federal government shutdown, grant cuts, manufacturing slowdowns, or a dip in tourism — some employers face the difficult decision to reduce staff. If layoffs are on the table, approach them with empathy, clarity, and legal diligence.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently joined the Seventh and Ninth Circuits in holding that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (“EEOC”) investigatory powers do not end after the agency issues a right-to-sue notice and the charging party files a lawsuit.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently joined the Seventh and Ninth Circuits in holding that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (“EEOC”) investigatory powers do not end after the agency issues a right-to-sue notice and the charging party files a lawsuit.
The pace of New York’s 2025 legal updates has been brisk. Below is a quick digest of what matters now so you can communicate the changes to your employees, update employee handbooks, payroll systems, and training, and post required notices before year-end.
The pace of New York’s 2025 legal updates has been brisk. Below is a quick digest of what matters now so you can communicate the changes to your employees, update employee handbooks, payroll systems, and training, and post required notices before year-end.
Earlier this month, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) decided to cease its efforts to implement a nationwide prohibition on employer non-compete agreements. This decision followed the agency's decision not to appeal against a nationwide injunction that had stalled the Rule's implementation.
Earlier this month, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) decided to cease its efforts to implement a nationwide prohibition on employer non-compete agreements. This decision followed the agency's decision not to appeal against a nationwide injunction that had stalled the Rule's implementation.
In 2024, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, which arose out of a sex discrimination claim filed by a female police officer. Officer Muldrow was transferred to a different position within the police department after she was replaced by a male employee in a specialized intelligence unit. The City argued the plaintiff could not sustain a claim because she had not suffered a loss in pay or other tangible harm that could be considered an adverse employment action. Although the City had prevailed at the trial and appellate court levels, the Supreme Court reversed those decisions. In the Court’s view, “[a]lthough an employee must show some harm from a forced transfer to prevail in a Title VII suit, she need not show that the injury satisfies a significance test.”
In 2024, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, which arose out of a sex discrimination claim filed by a female police officer. Officer Muldrow was transferred to a different position within the police department after she was replaced by a male employee in a specialized intelligence unit. The City argued the plaintiff could not sustain a claim because she had not suffered a loss in pay or other tangible harm that could be considered an adverse employment action. Although the City had prevailed at the trial and appellate court levels, the Supreme Court reversed those decisions. In the Court’s view, “[a]lthough an employee must show some harm from a forced transfer to prevail in a Title VII suit, she need not show that the injury satisfies a significance test.”
The recently enacted One Big Beautiful Bill Act (the “Act”) introduces several significant amendments to the Internal Revenue Code (“IRC”) that directly affect U.S. employers and employees. Key provisions—particularly the elimination of federal income tax on certain tips and overtime pay—are summarized below.
The recently enacted One Big Beautiful Bill Act (the “Act”) introduces several significant amendments to the Internal Revenue Code (“IRC”) that directly affect U.S. employers and employees. Key provisions—particularly the elimination of federal income tax on certain tips and overtime pay—are summarized below.
Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly automating the very tasks that once anchored white-collar exemptions under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and comparable state laws. When algorithms screen résumés, rank job candidates, flag compliance risks, review documents, or analyze vast data sets, the human role can shift from “decision-maker” to “button-pusher.”
Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly automating the very tasks that once anchored white-collar exemptions under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and comparable state laws. When algorithms screen résumés, rank job candidates, flag compliance risks, review documents, or analyze vast data sets, the human role can shift from “decision-maker” to “button-pusher.”
Home healthcare employers – take note. The U.S. Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division (WHD) issued Field Assistance Bulletin No. 2025-4 on July 25, 2025 (FAB), announcing that it will immediately stop enforcing the 2013 regulations that dramatically restricted use of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) companionship and live-in domestic service exemptions (the Companionship Exemption).
Home healthcare employers – take note. The U.S. Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division (WHD) issued Field Assistance Bulletin No. 2025-4 on July 25, 2025 (FAB), announcing that it will immediately stop enforcing the 2013 regulations that dramatically restricted use of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) companionship and live-in domestic service exemptions (the Companionship Exemption).
As of July 2, 2025, New York City’s new rules for paid prenatal personal care leave are in effect. With the first month of enforcement now behind us, it is critical for all employers with employees working in New York City to ensure they are fully compliant to avoid costly penalties.
As of July 2, 2025, New York City’s new rules for paid prenatal personal care leave are in effect. With the first month of enforcement now behind us, it is critical for all employers with employees working in New York City to ensure they are fully compliant to avoid costly penalties.
The Administration’s “Big Beautiful Bill” includes a new overtime tax provision, broadly described as “No Tax on Overtime.” More accurately, the Bill allows an employee tax deduction of a portion of overtime payments, up to a maximum deduction. Administering this new employee-benefitting tax deduction will require increased recordkeeping by employers.
The Administration’s “Big Beautiful Bill” includes a new overtime tax provision, broadly described as “No Tax on Overtime.” More accurately, the Bill allows an employee tax deduction of a portion of overtime payments, up to a maximum deduction. Administering this new employee-benefitting tax deduction will require increased recordkeeping by employers.
A recent decision from the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington highlights the importance of clear, documented reasons for employee terminations. In Kang v. The Boeing Company, a case involving a former in-house attorney at Boeing, the trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Boeing, dismissing the employee’s claims of racial discrimination, retaliation, and hostile work environment.
A recent decision from the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington highlights the importance of clear, documented reasons for employee terminations. In Kang v. The Boeing Company, a case involving a former in-house attorney at Boeing, the trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Boeing, dismissing the employee’s claims of racial discrimination, retaliation, and hostile work environment.
The Employee Retention Credit (ERC) was introduced as part of the March 2020 Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act to encourage businesses to maintain their workforce during the economic disruptions of the COVID-19 pandemic. Over time, legislative developments—most notably through the December 2020 Consolidated Appropriations Act and the March 2021 American Rescue Plan Act—expanded both the eligibility criteria and the potential credit amounts.
The Employee Retention Credit (ERC) was introduced as part of the March 2020 Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act to encourage businesses to maintain their workforce during the economic disruptions of the COVID-19 pandemic. Over time, legislative developments—most notably through the December 2020 Consolidated Appropriations Act and the March 2021 American Rescue Plan Act—expanded both the eligibility criteria and the potential credit amounts.
As of July 1, 2025, Maryland prohibits or restricts non-compete provisions for nearly all healthcare professionals. The prohibition applies to individuals: (1) required to be licensed under the Maryland Health Occupations Article (licensed physicians, nurses, physical therapists, social workers, etc.), (2) who provide “direct patient care,” and (3) who earn less than $350,000 annually.
As of July 1, 2025, Maryland prohibits or restricts non-compete provisions for nearly all healthcare professionals. The prohibition applies to individuals: (1) required to be licensed under the Maryland Health Occupations Article (licensed physicians, nurses, physical therapists, social workers, etc.), (2) who provide “direct patient care,” and (3) who earn less than $350,000 annually.
Ruling on a matter of first impression under Maryland law, the Maryland Supreme Court recently decided, in Martinez, et al. v. Amazon.com Services LLC, Misc. No. 17, Sept. Term 2024 (July 3, 2025), that the rule of “de minimis non curat lex,” more commonly known as the “de minimis rule” or “rule of trifles,” applies to claims made under the Maryland Wage & Hour law. The underlying principle of the rule is that there are some matters that are so small, negligible or insubstantial, that a court should decline to entertain a claim for damages.
Ruling on a matter of first impression under Maryland law, the Maryland Supreme Court recently decided, in Martinez, et al. v. Amazon.com Services LLC, Misc. No. 17, Sept. Term 2024 (July 3, 2025), that the rule of “de minimis non curat lex,” more commonly known as the “de minimis rule” or “rule of trifles,” applies to claims made under the Maryland Wage & Hour law. The underlying principle of the rule is that there are some matters that are so small, negligible or insubstantial, that a court should decline to entertain a claim for damages.
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) imposes a general requirement on employers with fifteen or more employees to refrain from discriminating against qualified individuals on the basis of a disability.
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) imposes a general requirement on employers with fifteen or more employees to refrain from discriminating against qualified individuals on the basis of a disability.
On June 5, 2025, in a unanimous and highly anticipated decision, the U.S. Supreme Court in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, No. 23-1039, clarified a critical point in employment law: all employees—regardless of whether they belong to a majority or minority group—are entitled to the same standard when bringing discrimination claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended (“Title VII”). This ruling sweeps away conflicting lower court decisions that imposed a higher evidentiary burden on majority-group plaintiffs, such as white or heterosexual employees.
On June 5, 2025, in a unanimous and highly anticipated decision, the U.S. Supreme Court in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, No. 23-1039, clarified a critical point in employment law: all employees—regardless of whether they belong to a majority or minority group—are entitled to the same standard when bringing discrimination claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended (“Title VII”). This ruling sweeps away conflicting lower court decisions that imposed a higher evidentiary burden on majority-group plaintiffs, such as white or heterosexual employees.
Employers remain obligated to complete and submit their EEO-1 reports, even with the current administration’s aggressive reworking of the anti-discrimination landscape. Federal mandatory reporting requirements require private employers with 100 or more employees and federal contractors with 50 or more employees that meet certain criteria to report annually the number of individuals they employ by job category and by sex, race or ethnicity.
Employers remain obligated to complete and submit their EEO-1 reports, even with the current administration’s aggressive reworking of the anti-discrimination landscape. Federal mandatory reporting requirements require private employers with 100 or more employees and federal contractors with 50 or more employees that meet certain criteria to report annually the number of individuals they employ by job category and by sex, race or ethnicity.
Virginia has further restricted noncompete agreements. Effective July 1, 2025, Virginia Code § 40.1-28.7:8 will prohibit Virginia employers from entering into non-competition agreements with employees who are classified as non-exempt under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The FLSA is the federal law that governs how employees are paid. Nonexempt employees are those who are subject to minimum wage and overtime provisions of the FLSA. The updated law will not affect employees who meet the requirements for an exemption as set forth by the FLSA, for example, employees who meet with executive, professional, and administrative salary basis and duties.
Virginia has further restricted noncompete agreements. Effective July 1, 2025, Virginia Code § 40.1-28.7:8 will prohibit Virginia employers from entering into non-competition agreements with employees who are classified as non-exempt under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The FLSA is the federal law that governs how employees are paid. Nonexempt employees are those who are subject to minimum wage and overtime provisions of the FLSA. The updated law will not affect employees who meet the requirements for an exemption as set forth by the FLSA, for example, employees who meet with executive, professional, and administrative salary basis and duties.
On Friday, June 6, 2025, US District Judge Claudia Wilken of the United States District Court, Northern District of California, Oakland Division, finally approved the $2.8 billion settlement agreement arising from Case No. 4:20-cv-03919-CW In re: College Athlete NIL Litigation (“Settlement Agreement”), a class action lawsuit against the NCAA and the Power Five Conferences challenging their rules restricting payments to student-athletes, including payments related to student-athletes names, images, and likenesses (NIL) for commercial purposes. The Settlement Agreement will reshape college sports by allowing universities to pay student-athletes directly starting July 1, 2025, effectively ending the NCAA’s longstanding argument that student-athletes are amateurs and should, therefore, not be paid.
On Friday, June 6, 2025, US District Judge Claudia Wilken of the United States District Court, Northern District of California, Oakland Division, finally approved the $2.8 billion settlement agreement arising from Case No. 4:20-cv-03919-CW In re: College Athlete NIL Litigation (“Settlement Agreement”), a class action lawsuit against the NCAA and the Power Five Conferences challenging their rules restricting payments to student-athletes, including payments related to student-athletes names, images, and likenesses (NIL) for commercial purposes. The Settlement Agreement will reshape college sports by allowing universities to pay student-athletes directly starting July 1, 2025, effectively ending the NCAA’s longstanding argument that student-athletes are amateurs and should, therefore, not be paid.
On May 15, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas vacated portions of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (“EEOC”) 2024 Enforcement Guidance on Harassment in the Workplace that addressed gender identity.
On May 15, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas vacated portions of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (“EEOC”) 2024 Enforcement Guidance on Harassment in the Workplace that addressed gender identity.
The U.S. Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division (“DOL”) under the Trump administration has doubled down on its commitment to the traditional economic-realities analysis for determining whether workers are employees or independent contractors under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”). Like many issues subject to federal agency interpretation, the analysis surrounding the classification of employees versus independent contractors is subject to the swinging pendulum of who resides in the White House.
The U.S. Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division (“DOL”) under the Trump administration has doubled down on its commitment to the traditional economic-realities analysis for determining whether workers are employees or independent contractors under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”). Like many issues subject to federal agency interpretation, the analysis surrounding the classification of employees versus independent contractors is subject to the swinging pendulum of who resides in the White House.
An Executive Order signed on April 23, 2025, promises to significantly limit federal enforcement tools in pursuing systemic discrimination claims. The Executive Order, titled “Restoring Equality in Opportunity and Meritocracy,” directs all federal agencies to “deprioritize enforcement of all statutes and regulations to the extent they include disparate impact liability.” The Executive Order applies to employment-related claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, and to non-discrimination provisions under other federal programs, including the Fair Housing Act, and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
An Executive Order signed on April 23, 2025, promises to significantly limit federal enforcement tools in pursuing systemic discrimination claims. The Executive Order, titled “Restoring Equality in Opportunity and Meritocracy,” directs all federal agencies to “deprioritize enforcement of all statutes and regulations to the extent they include disparate impact liability.” The Executive Order applies to employment-related claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, and to non-discrimination provisions under other federal programs, including the Fair Housing Act, and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
In a significant shift for businesses, nonprofit organizations and gig-economy workers, the Department of Labor (DOL) Wage and Hour Division (WHD) announced on May 1st that it will no longer enforce the 2024 independent contractor rule (which outlined the framework for determining employee or independent contractor status under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act) as it works to rescind the regulation entirely. The DOL’s decision — as outlined in its Field Assistance Bulletin (FAB) No. 2025-1 — comes amid multiple ongoing lawsuits challenging the rule.
In a significant shift for businesses, nonprofit organizations and gig-economy workers, the Department of Labor (DOL) Wage and Hour Division (WHD) announced on May 1st that it will no longer enforce the 2024 independent contractor rule (which outlined the framework for determining employee or independent contractor status under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act) as it works to rescind the regulation entirely. The DOL’s decision — as outlined in its Field Assistance Bulletin (FAB) No. 2025-1 — comes amid multiple ongoing lawsuits challenging the rule.
The start of summer is typically marked by a wave of temporary hirings of students and other new employees, with many summer jobs paying those workers the minimum wage. While a series of increases across recent years have brought the Maryland state minimum wage to $15.00 per hour, employers in two of Maryland’s most heavily populated counties should be aware of local ordinances that require higher hourly wages.
The start of summer is typically marked by a wave of temporary hirings of students and other new employees, with many summer jobs paying those workers the minimum wage. While a series of increases across recent years have brought the Maryland state minimum wage to $15.00 per hour, employers in two of Maryland’s most heavily populated counties should be aware of local ordinances that require higher hourly wages.
This summer will be the first for which Maryland employers will need to ensure compliance with the newly established heat management regulations issued by Maryland’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (MOSHA), enacted in September 2024. These regulations apply to any Maryland employer whose employees engage in employment activities, indoor or outdoor, for longer than 15 minutes, in which an employee is exposed to a heat index in the area where the employee is working that equals or exceeds 80 degrees Fahrenheit.
This summer will be the first for which Maryland employers will need to ensure compliance with the newly established heat management regulations issued by Maryland’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (MOSHA), enacted in September 2024. These regulations apply to any Maryland employer whose employees engage in employment activities, indoor or outdoor, for longer than 15 minutes, in which an employee is exposed to a heat index in the area where the employee is working that equals or exceeds 80 degrees Fahrenheit.
Since January, multiple fundamental developments have dramatically altered the Title IX landscape, signaling a seismic shift in its interpretation and enforcement. These developments include a rapidly escalating and public feud between the Trump administration and the Maine Department of Education over Maine’s refusal to ban transgender girls from participating in school athletic competitions designated exclusively for girls. These interpretation and enforcement developments implicate issues of constitutional law, states’ rights and practical politics, and it is critical for those working in education and receiving federal funding to understand and navigate the changes.
Since January, multiple fundamental developments have dramatically altered the Title IX landscape, signaling a seismic shift in its interpretation and enforcement. These developments include a rapidly escalating and public feud between the Trump administration and the Maine Department of Education over Maine’s refusal to ban transgender girls from participating in school athletic competitions designated exclusively for girls. These interpretation and enforcement developments implicate issues of constitutional law, states’ rights and practical politics, and it is critical for those working in education and receiving federal funding to understand and navigate the changes.
The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals has lifted a nationwide injunction on the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) Executive Orders issued by President Trump in January 2025. This means the DEI Executive Orders can and will be enforced while litigation over their constitutionality continues. The Fourth Circuit’s decision restores the government’s ability to enforce three key provisions.
The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals has lifted a nationwide injunction on the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) Executive Orders issued by President Trump in January 2025. This means the DEI Executive Orders can and will be enforced while litigation over their constitutionality continues. The Fourth Circuit’s decision restores the government’s ability to enforce three key provisions.
Artificial intelligence is transforming the workplace, enhancing efficiency and innovation. However, its growing role in business operations, hiring and employment presents significant legal challenges.
Artificial intelligence is transforming the workplace, enhancing efficiency and innovation. However, its growing role in business operations, hiring and employment presents significant legal challenges.
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) recently signaled a new focus on protecting American workers from unlawful national origin discrimination by employers who prefer non-American workers, such as “illegal aliens, migrant workers, and visa holders.” In a press release issued on February 19, 2025, EEOC Acting Chair Andrea Lucas vowed to “put employers and other covered entities on notice” and to “rigorously enforce the law” against this type of bias, which she said is “a large-scale problem in multiple industries nationwide.”
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) recently signaled a new focus on protecting American workers from unlawful national origin discrimination by employers who prefer non-American workers, such as “illegal aliens, migrant workers, and visa holders.” In a press release issued on February 19, 2025, EEOC Acting Chair Andrea Lucas vowed to “put employers and other covered entities on notice” and to “rigorously enforce the law” against this type of bias, which she said is “a large-scale problem in multiple industries nationwide.”
The legal landscape surrounding Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) settlements is changing as a result of a split among federal courts on whether such settlements actually require judicial or Department of Labor (“DOL”) approval. The FLSA itself does not prescribe such approval. Instead, the requirement originated from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit’s 1982 decision in Lynn’s Food Stores, Inc. v. U.S., in which the court held that “to approve an agreement between an employer and an employee outside of the adversarial context of a lawsuit brought by the employees would be in clear derogation of the letter and spirit of the FLSA.”
The legal landscape surrounding Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) settlements is changing as a result of a split among federal courts on whether such settlements actually require judicial or Department of Labor (“DOL”) approval. The FLSA itself does not prescribe such approval. Instead, the requirement originated from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit’s 1982 decision in Lynn’s Food Stores, Inc. v. U.S., in which the court held that “to approve an agreement between an employer and an employee outside of the adversarial context of a lawsuit brought by the employees would be in clear derogation of the letter and spirit of the FLSA.”
As private equity leaders and their in-house counsel gear up for the anticipated surge in IPOs in 2025, the importance of thorough labor and employment law due diligence cannot be overstated. With the IPO market poised for a significant rebound, the stakes have never been higher. This article delves into why labor and employment law due diligence is critical before going public and highlights emerging trends that could impact legal risks.
As private equity leaders and their in-house counsel gear up for the anticipated surge in IPOs in 2025, the importance of thorough labor and employment law due diligence cannot be overstated. With the IPO market poised for a significant rebound, the stakes have never been higher. This article delves into why labor and employment law due diligence is critical before going public and highlights emerging trends that could impact legal risks.
Just as employers are reconsidering their approach to DEI and the myriad of potential risks such policies could present under current administration enforcement priorities, the Supreme Court recently heard arguments in a case that could provide a stronger footing for so-called “reverse discrimination claims.”
Just as employers are reconsidering their approach to DEI and the myriad of potential risks such policies could present under current administration enforcement priorities, the Supreme Court recently heard arguments in a case that could provide a stronger footing for so-called “reverse discrimination claims.”
A change in presidential administrations generally results in a wide array of new developments for federal agencies. That is particularly true for the National Labor Relations Board, which has broad jurisdiction over union organizing disputes and related labor law issues. The five members of the NLRB are appointed by the President, and thus a change in the party controlling the executive branch is typically followed by a reversal of policy positions reflected in decisions issued while a majority of the Board consisted of members appointed by the prior administration. Because NLRB members are appointed for five-year terms, there is often a delay between the time a new President takes office and when decisions of the Board begin to reflect the change in administration.
A change in presidential administrations generally results in a wide array of new developments for federal agencies. That is particularly true for the National Labor Relations Board, which has broad jurisdiction over union organizing disputes and related labor law issues. The five members of the NLRB are appointed by the President, and thus a change in the party controlling the executive branch is typically followed by a reversal of policy positions reflected in decisions issued while a majority of the Board consisted of members appointed by the prior administration. Because NLRB members are appointed for five-year terms, there is often a delay between the time a new President takes office and when decisions of the Board begin to reflect the change in administration.
On February 5, 2025, the U.S. Attorney General (“AG”) Pam Bondi issued a memorandum to all Justice Department employees titled “Ending Illegal DEI and DEIA Discrimination and Preferences,” outlining the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) intention to “investigate, eliminate and penalize illegal DEI and DEIA preferences, mandates, policies, programs and activities in the private sector and in educational institutions that receive federal funds.” This directive follows Executive Order 14173, signed by President Trump on January 21, 2025, which had a stated aim of ending illegal discrimination and restoring merit-based opportunities.
On February 5, 2025, the U.S. Attorney General (“AG”) Pam Bondi issued a memorandum to all Justice Department employees titled “Ending Illegal DEI and DEIA Discrimination and Preferences,” outlining the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) intention to “investigate, eliminate and penalize illegal DEI and DEIA preferences, mandates, policies, programs and activities in the private sector and in educational institutions that receive federal funds.” This directive follows Executive Order 14173, signed by President Trump on January 21, 2025, which had a stated aim of ending illegal discrimination and restoring merit-based opportunities.
In a case successfully defended on behalf of a Maryland employer by Whiteford attorneys before the U.S. District Court for Maryland, an employee challenged a Maryland employer’s right to terminate employment due to the use of medically prescribed marijuana during working hours. The employee claimed that under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), he enjoyed the right to use marijuana, medically prescribed, to address his anxiety disorder, as a reasonable ADA accommodation for his disability.
In a case successfully defended on behalf of a Maryland employer by Whiteford attorneys before the U.S. District Court for Maryland, an employee challenged a Maryland employer’s right to terminate employment due to the use of medically prescribed marijuana during working hours. The employee claimed that under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), he enjoyed the right to use marijuana, medically prescribed, to address his anxiety disorder, as a reasonable ADA accommodation for his disability.
On January 20 and 21, 2025, President Trump issued several executive orders (“EOs” that significantly impact diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (“DEI” and “DEIA”) programs and initiatives. These executive orders represent a significant shift in federal policy regarding DEI programs. While many of these executive orders are directed at the Federal government workforce, this client alert focuses on two executive orders that have direct implications for the private sector, including nonprofits and associations: "Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity" and "Defending Women From Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government."
On January 20 and 21, 2025, President Trump issued several executive orders (“EOs” that significantly impact diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (“DEI” and “DEIA”) programs and initiatives. These executive orders represent a significant shift in federal policy regarding DEI programs. While many of these executive orders are directed at the Federal government workforce, this client alert focuses on two executive orders that have direct implications for the private sector, including nonprofits and associations: "Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity" and "Defending Women From Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government."
On Friday, January 17, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the ban on TikTok requiring that it be divested from its Chinese parent company over national security concerns or face a nationwide ban. The Supreme Court held that the Act banning TikTok did not violate applicable free speech rights.
On Friday, January 17, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the ban on TikTok requiring that it be divested from its Chinese parent company over national security concerns or face a nationwide ban. The Supreme Court held that the Act banning TikTok did not violate applicable free speech rights.
As we usher in the new year, there are several significant employment law changes set to take effect impacting Maryland employers. Here is a detailed look at what you need to know to ensure compliance and stay ahead of the curve.
As we usher in the new year, there are several significant employment law changes set to take effect impacting Maryland employers. Here is a detailed look at what you need to know to ensure compliance and stay ahead of the curve.
In a January 7, 2025, ruling, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the dismissal of a former student’s Title IX lawsuit against North Carolina State University. The case, Doe v. North Carolina State University, centers on allegations that the university was deliberately indifferent to prior allegations of sexual misconduct by Robert Murphy, the then-director of Sports Medicine, who allegedly sexually abused Doe under the guise of medical treatment.
In a January 7, 2025, ruling, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the dismissal of a former student’s Title IX lawsuit against North Carolina State University. The case, Doe v. North Carolina State University, centers on allegations that the university was deliberately indifferent to prior allegations of sexual misconduct by Robert Murphy, the then-director of Sports Medicine, who allegedly sexually abused Doe under the guise of medical treatment.
Immigration policy, in one form or another, touches virtually every business in the United States. All employers are subject to the requirements of the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act, which established the I-9 verification process, and many employers rely on immigrant workers, be they students on Optional Practical Training, H-1B professional workers, asylees and refugees, employees in Temporary Protected Status (TPS), trainees, or even highly educated and skilled workers, who provide critical know-how and expertise to drive their business.
Immigration policy, in one form or another, touches virtually every business in the United States. All employers are subject to the requirements of the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act, which established the I-9 verification process, and many employers rely on immigrant workers, be they students on Optional Practical Training, H-1B professional workers, asylees and refugees, employees in Temporary Protected Status (TPS), trainees, or even highly educated and skilled workers, who provide critical know-how and expertise to drive their business.
As the advancements in medicine grow, so too do the number of clinical trials. Clinical trials for serious medical conditions are nothing new. Recently, the U.S. Department of Labor analyzed whether the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) covers employees taking time off work to participate in a clinical trial for their own serious health condition. On November 8, 2024, the U.S. Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division issued an Opinion Letter concluding that based on the facts presented, the FMLA applied to the leave sought by the employee to participate in clinical trials for an employee’s treatment of a serious health condition.
As the advancements in medicine grow, so too do the number of clinical trials. Clinical trials for serious medical conditions are nothing new. Recently, the U.S. Department of Labor analyzed whether the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) covers employees taking time off work to participate in a clinical trial for their own serious health condition. On November 8, 2024, the U.S. Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division issued an Opinion Letter concluding that based on the facts presented, the FMLA applied to the leave sought by the employee to participate in clinical trials for an employee’s treatment of a serious health condition.
New York City Councilman Shaun Abreu, a cat owner, has introduced a groundbreaking bill — Introduction 1089 — that could make New York City the first jurisdiction in the nation to offer paid sick leave for pet care.
New York City Councilman Shaun Abreu, a cat owner, has introduced a groundbreaking bill — Introduction 1089 — that could make New York City the first jurisdiction in the nation to offer paid sick leave for pet care.
In 2022, Maryland’s General Assembly passed legislation creating a program of paid family leave for Maryland employees, under which employees who need to miss work for a qualifying reason will be able to submit a claim for benefits and recoup a portion of the wages they would have otherwise earned. Since the paid family leave statute was first passed, its implementation has been delayed by the General Assembly twice. Currently, payroll tax contributions to fund the program are scheduled to begin on July 1, 2025, with benefits becoming available to Maryland employees on July 1, 2026.
In 2022, Maryland’s General Assembly passed legislation creating a program of paid family leave for Maryland employees, under which employees who need to miss work for a qualifying reason will be able to submit a claim for benefits and recoup a portion of the wages they would have otherwise earned. Since the paid family leave statute was first passed, its implementation has been delayed by the General Assembly twice. Currently, payroll tax contributions to fund the program are scheduled to begin on July 1, 2025, with benefits becoming available to Maryland employees on July 1, 2026.
On November 13, 2024, in a landmark decision, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) ruled that “captive audience” meetings –? where an employer requires workers to attend a meeting in which the employer expresses its opinion about unionization –? are unlawful. This ruling, stemming from a case involving Amazon.com, marks a significant shift in labor law, overturning more than 75 years of established precedent. This ruling will apply prospectively.
On November 13, 2024, in a landmark decision, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) ruled that “captive audience” meetings –? where an employer requires workers to attend a meeting in which the employer expresses its opinion about unionization –? are unlawful. This ruling, stemming from a case involving Amazon.com, marks a significant shift in labor law, overturning more than 75 years of established precedent. This ruling will apply prospectively.
The reelection of Donald Trump is expected to bring about significant changes in federal enforcement of employment-related policies. These changes will likely reverse many of the pro-employee initiatives introduced during the Biden administration, as well as significantly impact enforcement priorities. Employers should be prepared for a shift towards more pro-employer policies and adjustments in the regulatory landscape.
The reelection of Donald Trump is expected to bring about significant changes in federal enforcement of employment-related policies. These changes will likely reverse many of the pro-employee initiatives introduced during the Biden administration, as well as significantly impact enforcement priorities. Employers should be prepared for a shift towards more pro-employer policies and adjustments in the regulatory landscape.
With the October 2024 Term of the U.S. Supreme Court just underway, employers should take note of several employment related cases on this Term’s docket that may significantly alter certain aspects of current employment law. This post highlights three such cases.
With the October 2024 Term of the U.S. Supreme Court just underway, employers should take note of several employment related cases on this Term’s docket that may significantly alter certain aspects of current employment law. This post highlights three such cases.
Election Day is just around the corner on November 5, 2024, although many states permit early voting. In fact, according to CNN, more than 18 million Americans have already voted.
Election Day is just around the corner on November 5, 2024, although many states permit early voting. In fact, according to CNN, more than 18 million Americans have already voted.
Employers who require their employees to stay with them for a certain period of time after receiving company-paid training, education, or other benefits may face legal challenges from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). On October 7, 2024, the NLRB's General Counsel, Jennifer Abruzzo, issued GC Memorandum 25-01 (the Memo) announcing her intention to prosecute employers who use these "stay or pay" agreements, which she views as similar to unlawful noncompete agreements that restrict employees' mobility and rights.
Employers who require their employees to stay with them for a certain period of time after receiving company-paid training, education, or other benefits may face legal challenges from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). On October 7, 2024, the NLRB's General Counsel, Jennifer Abruzzo, issued GC Memorandum 25-01 (the Memo) announcing her intention to prosecute employers who use these "stay or pay" agreements, which she views as similar to unlawful noncompete agreements that restrict employees' mobility and rights.
With Election Day quickly approaching and voting already underway in many states, employers should refresh their understanding of best practices for navigating political speech in the workplace.
With Election Day quickly approaching and voting already underway in many states, employers should refresh their understanding of best practices for navigating political speech in the workplace.
On October 1, 2024, U.S. Dockworkers at America’s largest ports along the East and Gulf coasts went on strike. The International Longshoremen’s Association union, representing approximately 45,000 port workers, initiated the strike following breakdowns in negotiations about pay increases and automation projects.
On October 1, 2024, U.S. Dockworkers at America’s largest ports along the East and Gulf coasts went on strike. The International Longshoremen’s Association union, representing approximately 45,000 port workers, initiated the strike following breakdowns in negotiations about pay increases and automation projects.
During this year’s legislative session, the Maryland General Assembly passed new laws requiring employers to disclose certain wage information when posting job openings, as well as requirements to provide existing employees with certain information in pay statements issued with their paychecks. Each of these laws will take effect on October 1, 2024.
During this year’s legislative session, the Maryland General Assembly passed new laws requiring employers to disclose certain wage information when posting job openings, as well as requirements to provide existing employees with certain information in pay statements issued with their paychecks. Each of these laws will take effect on October 1, 2024.
On August 28, 2024, New York State’s Freelance Isn’t Free Law (“FIFL”) took effect, extending protections to freelance workers statewide. This sweeping law is codified in a new Article 44-A to New York State’s General Business Law, ensuring clear expectations for both independent contractors and the organizations that engage them throughout New York State.
On August 28, 2024, New York State’s Freelance Isn’t Free Law (“FIFL”) took effect, extending protections to freelance workers statewide. This sweeping law is codified in a new Article 44-A to New York State’s General Business Law, ensuring clear expectations for both independent contractors and the organizations that engage them throughout New York State.
Recent surveys indicate the widespread use of generative AI (artificial intelligence) and other artificial intelligence tools by employees in the workplace. This is hardly surprising, given the astonishing level of efficiencies that AI tools offer for content generation, predictions, recommendations, and a seemingly endless number of other outcomes.
Recent surveys indicate the widespread use of generative AI (artificial intelligence) and other artificial intelligence tools by employees in the workplace. This is hardly surprising, given the astonishing level of efficiencies that AI tools offer for content generation, predictions, recommendations, and a seemingly endless number of other outcomes.
Many employers may be unaware of the ability to establish Educational Assistance Programs that allow their employees to repay educational loans with pretax dollars. In March 2020, the IRS established the option for employers to include, in a qualifying Educational Assistance Program (see IRS Code Section 127), the ability of employees to pay back their college loans, including principal and interest, with pretax dollars.
Many employers may be unaware of the ability to establish Educational Assistance Programs that allow their employees to repay educational loans with pretax dollars. In March 2020, the IRS established the option for employers to include, in a qualifying Educational Assistance Program (see IRS Code Section 127), the ability of employees to pay back their college loans, including principal and interest, with pretax dollars.
In two separate rulings this week, federal agencies were stopped from enforcing new rulemaking that would significantly remake key areas of employment and non-discrimination law.
In two separate rulings this week, federal agencies were stopped from enforcing new rulemaking that would significantly remake key areas of employment and non-discrimination law.
Few issues are more sensitive for employers than accommodating employees’ religious practices and observances. In recent years, Muslim employees and their employers have struggled with how to handle the religious requirement to perform obligatory prayers while at work. Few issues are more sensitive for employers than accommodating employees’ religious practices and observances. In recent years, Muslim employees and their employers have struggled with how to handle the religious requirement to perform obligatory prayers while at work.
Few issues are more sensitive for employers than accommodating employees’ religious practices and observances. In recent years, Muslim employees and their employers have struggled with how to handle the religious requirement to perform obligatory prayers while at work. Few issues are more sensitive for employers than accommodating employees’ religious practices and observances. In recent years, Muslim employees and their employers have struggled with how to handle the religious requirement to perform obligatory prayers while at work.
In this webinar, Betsy Davis, partner and Co-Chair of Whiteford's Labor & Employment Section, discussed the significant changes introduced by the Department of Labor's Final Rule, issued in April 2024, which raised the salary threshold for salaried exempt employees under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).
In this webinar, Betsy Davis, partner and Co-Chair of Whiteford's Labor & Employment Section, discussed the significant changes introduced by the Department of Labor's Final Rule, issued in April 2024, which raised the salary threshold for salaried exempt employees under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).
In this webinar, Whiteford’s Labor and Employment Law Partners, Lisa Brauner and David Stevens, along with Eileen Johnson, Co-chair of Whiteford’s Associations & Nonprofit Organizations Section, discussed the significant changes to the salary threshold for salaried exempt employees under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) following the U.S. Department of Labor's Final Rule issued in April 2024.
In this webinar, Whiteford’s Labor and Employment Law Partners, Lisa Brauner and David Stevens, along with Eileen Johnson, Co-chair of Whiteford’s Associations & Nonprofit Organizations Section, discussed the significant changes to the salary threshold for salaried exempt employees under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) following the U.S. Department of Labor's Final Rule issued in April 2024.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently ruled, in Okonowsky v. Garland, No. 23-55404, that an employer may be held liable for a Title VII hostile work environment claim based on harassing content posted on an employee’s personal social media account outside the workplace.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently ruled, in Okonowsky v. Garland, No. 23-55404, that an employer may be held liable for a Title VII hostile work environment claim based on harassing content posted on an employee’s personal social media account outside the workplace.
On July 29, 2024, the California Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion in Bailey v. San Francisco Dist. Attorney Office, Cal., No. S265223, and held that the employee’s claims of racial harassment should proceed to jury trial and the trial court's summary judgment decision for the employer was in error.
On July 29, 2024, the California Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion in Bailey v. San Francisco Dist. Attorney Office, Cal., No. S265223, and held that the employee’s claims of racial harassment should proceed to jury trial and the trial court's summary judgment decision for the employer was in error.
Most employers are familiar with their obligation to comply with various federal and state employment laws when it comes to management and compensation of their own employees. One often overlooked risk for employers stems from the doctrine of “joint employment,” under which courts and agencies have held that – in certain factual circumstances – a company can be held liable for the employment violations of another business.
Most employers are familiar with their obligation to comply with various federal and state employment laws when it comes to management and compensation of their own employees. One often overlooked risk for employers stems from the doctrine of “joint employment,” under which courts and agencies have held that – in certain factual circumstances – a company can be held liable for the employment violations of another business.
On July 2, 2024, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) released a proposed rule aimed at mitigating worker illnesses from extreme heat in indoor and outdoor work settings. This proposed Heat Injury and Illness Prevention standard – publicized through a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking – arrives at a critical juncture due to the alarming rise in temperatures in the U.S. and globally.
On July 2, 2024, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) released a proposed rule aimed at mitigating worker illnesses from extreme heat in indoor and outdoor work settings. This proposed Heat Injury and Illness Prevention standard – publicized through a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking – arrives at a critical juncture due to the alarming rise in temperatures in the U.S. and globally.
On July 3, 2024, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, in Ryan, LLC v. Federal Trade Commission, issued a preliminary injunction and ruled it was a substantial probability that the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) lacks authority to issue its April 23, 2024, Final Rule generally nullifying all non-compete provisions, which becomes effective September 4, 2024. The injunction is only a temporary halt, and the Ryan court promised a full decision before August 30, 2024, just a few days before the Rule’s September 4 effective date.
On July 3, 2024, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, in Ryan, LLC v. Federal Trade Commission, issued a preliminary injunction and ruled it was a substantial probability that the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) lacks authority to issue its April 23, 2024, Final Rule generally nullifying all non-compete provisions, which becomes effective September 4, 2024. The injunction is only a temporary halt, and the Ryan court promised a full decision before August 30, 2024, just a few days before the Rule’s September 4 effective date.
Earlier this year, the U.S. Department of Labor (“DOL”) issued a final rule modifying the standard for determining whether employees qualify for several key exemptions to the overtime pay requirements set by the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”).
Earlier this year, the U.S. Department of Labor (“DOL”) issued a final rule modifying the standard for determining whether employees qualify for several key exemptions to the overtime pay requirements set by the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”).
Employers are looking to save time and money and are turning to Artificial Intelligence (AI) in order to make employment practices more efficient. In Spring 2024, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) issued guidance to help employers navigate the use of AI. The takeaway for employers is that eliminating humans from critical employment processes could result in a violation of federal employment laws. This article discusses ways to avoid federal wage and hour claims when using AI.
Employers are looking to save time and money and are turning to Artificial Intelligence (AI) in order to make employment practices more efficient. In Spring 2024, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) issued guidance to help employers navigate the use of AI. The takeaway for employers is that eliminating humans from critical employment processes could result in a violation of federal employment laws. This article discusses ways to avoid federal wage and hour claims when using AI.
In a unanimous decision concerning the applicable standard for an injunction under Section 10(j) of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), the Supreme Court last week rejected a “reasonable cause” standard pushed by the National Labor Relations Board, which is charged with enforcing the Act, in favor of the stricter traditional four-part test for an injunction, ordinarily applied by the courts.
In a unanimous decision concerning the applicable standard for an injunction under Section 10(j) of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), the Supreme Court last week rejected a “reasonable cause” standard pushed by the National Labor Relations Board, which is charged with enforcing the Act, in favor of the stricter traditional four-part test for an injunction, ordinarily applied by the courts.
On or before July 1, 2024, all employers in New York City must provide current employees with a “Workers’ Bill of Rights” and post a multi-lingual “Your Rights at Work” poster that contains a QR code linking to the Workers’ Bill of Rights on NYC’s website, conspicuously in an area accessible and visible to all employees.
On or before July 1, 2024, all employers in New York City must provide current employees with a “Workers’ Bill of Rights” and post a multi-lingual “Your Rights at Work” poster that contains a QR code linking to the Workers’ Bill of Rights on NYC’s website, conspicuously in an area accessible and visible to all employees.
On May 23, 2024, the NCAA and the Power 5 conferences announced a $2.8 billion settlement that was reached in several antitrust class action lawsuits concerning payment for college athletes. The settlement marked a watershed moment, effectively sounding the death knell of “amateurism,” the longstanding argument by the NCAA for why college athletes should not be paid in Division I college sports.
On May 23, 2024, the NCAA and the Power 5 conferences announced a $2.8 billion settlement that was reached in several antitrust class action lawsuits concerning payment for college athletes. The settlement marked a watershed moment, effectively sounding the death knell of “amateurism,” the longstanding argument by the NCAA for why college athletes should not be paid in Division I college sports.
Every July 1, after the Virginia Legislature has carefully debated thousands of bills, those bills that survive the scrutiny of both chambers and the Governor go into effect. As this process plays out, employers need to be vigilant of any changes that may impact their business. This year, given the divide between the legislature and the Governor, the changes to the labor and employment landscape are minimal.
Every July 1, after the Virginia Legislature has carefully debated thousands of bills, those bills that survive the scrutiny of both chambers and the Governor go into effect. As this process plays out, employers need to be vigilant of any changes that may impact their business. This year, given the divide between the legislature and the Governor, the changes to the labor and employment landscape are minimal.
In April, Maryland Governor Wes Moore signed a sweeping ban on noncompete and conflict of interest provisions for certain veterinary and healthcare professionals. For veterinary professionals, the law takes effect this weekend, on June 1, 2024. The ban for healthcare professionals becomes effective next year, on July 1, 2025.
In April, Maryland Governor Wes Moore signed a sweeping ban on noncompete and conflict of interest provisions for certain veterinary and healthcare professionals. For veterinary professionals, the law takes effect this weekend, on June 1, 2024. The ban for healthcare professionals becomes effective next year, on July 1, 2025.
Previous installments of the Employment Law Update have discussed the status of Maryland’s paid family leave program, that will establish a process under which employees, who need to miss work for qualifying reasons, can submit claims to the state government for reimbursement of compensation lost because of their absences. The timetable for implementation of the program – originally created in 2022 – was extended last year under a bill passed by the General Assembly during its 2023 legislative session.
Previous installments of the Employment Law Update have discussed the status of Maryland’s paid family leave program, that will establish a process under which employees, who need to miss work for qualifying reasons, can submit claims to the state government for reimbursement of compensation lost because of their absences. The timetable for implementation of the program – originally created in 2022 – was extended last year under a bill passed by the General Assembly during its 2023 legislative session.
On Tuesday April 23, 2024, the Department of Labor issued a long expected Final Rule that substantially raises the salary threshold for salaried exempt employees under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The FLSA mandates the payment of overtime pay to non-exempt employees who work more than 40 hours in any given work week. There are, however, exemptions for employees who meet certain defined job requirements, such as bona fide executive, administrative and professional employees, provided these employees are also compensated on a “salary basis.”
On Tuesday April 23, 2024, the Department of Labor issued a long expected Final Rule that substantially raises the salary threshold for salaried exempt employees under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The FLSA mandates the payment of overtime pay to non-exempt employees who work more than 40 hours in any given work week. There are, however, exemptions for employees who meet certain defined job requirements, such as bona fide executive, administrative and professional employees, provided these employees are also compensated on a “salary basis.”
On April 23, 2024, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued a Final Rule that bans most existing non-compete agreements once the Rule becomes effective, which currently is estimated to be September 10, 2024.
On April 23, 2024, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued a Final Rule that bans most existing non-compete agreements once the Rule becomes effective, which currently is estimated to be September 10, 2024.
This webinar addresses the legal challenges presented by harassment, reverse discrimination and Section 1981 claims, among others, as well as various defenses and measures your team can take to reduce the risk of legal challenge. Presenters include Partners Peter Guattery and Dorothy Deng.
This webinar addresses the legal challenges presented by harassment, reverse discrimination and Section 1981 claims, among others, as well as various defenses and measures your team can take to reduce the risk of legal challenge. Presenters include Partners Peter Guattery and Dorothy Deng.
On April 15, 2024, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) published its Final Rule to implement the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (“PWFA”). The primary impact of the new law is that under the PWFA, employers of 15 employees or more are required to make affirmative efforts to accommodate a pregnant employee, not merely agree not to discriminate. The PWFA became law on June 27, 2023, but the requirements are not expected to take effect until June 2024 following the implementation of the Finale Rule.
On April 15, 2024, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) published its Final Rule to implement the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (“PWFA”). The primary impact of the new law is that under the PWFA, employers of 15 employees or more are required to make affirmative efforts to accommodate a pregnant employee, not merely agree not to discriminate. The PWFA became law on June 27, 2023, but the requirements are not expected to take effect until June 2024 following the implementation of the Finale Rule.
In a joint statement issued on April 4, 2024, five federal agencies, including the Department of Labor, announced they will apply their enforcement authorities to the use of automated systems, including artificial intelligence (AI). As the agencies put it, “Although many of these tools offer the promise of advancement, their use also has the potential to perpetuate unlawful bias, automate unlawful discrimination, and produce other harmful outcomes.”
In a joint statement issued on April 4, 2024, five federal agencies, including the Department of Labor, announced they will apply their enforcement authorities to the use of automated systems, including artificial intelligence (AI). As the agencies put it, “Although many of these tools offer the promise of advancement, their use also has the potential to perpetuate unlawful bias, automate unlawful discrimination, and produce other harmful outcomes.”
On March 29, 2024, the U.S. Department of Labor and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) published a final Rule clarifying the rights of employees to have a representative attend inspections performed by OSHA compliance officers. This Rule is effective May 31, 2024.
On March 29, 2024, the U.S. Department of Labor and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) published a final Rule clarifying the rights of employees to have a representative attend inspections performed by OSHA compliance officers. This Rule is effective May 31, 2024.
As California struggles with a new $20.00 per hour minimum wage for fast food workers, Virginia Governor, Glenn Youngkin, recently vetoed a legislative bill (H.B. 157) that would have raised the hourly minimum wage in Virginia from $12 to $15 by 2026.
As California struggles with a new $20.00 per hour minimum wage for fast food workers, Virginia Governor, Glenn Youngkin, recently vetoed a legislative bill (H.B. 157) that would have raised the hourly minimum wage in Virginia from $12 to $15 by 2026.
As covered in previous installments of the Employment Law Update, Maryland has joined a growing list of states in adopting a paid family leave program. Unlike traditional paid time off that is provided directly by an employer, the paid family leave program will be administered by the state government and will provide a system under which employees can receive reimbursement when they are absent from work for certain qualifying reasons.
As covered in previous installments of the Employment Law Update, Maryland has joined a growing list of states in adopting a paid family leave program. Unlike traditional paid time off that is provided directly by an employer, the paid family leave program will be administered by the state government and will provide a system under which employees can receive reimbursement when they are absent from work for certain qualifying reasons.
New York employers must now comply with a new privacy law in effect. Specifically, employers are prohibited from obtaining certain information and/or access to an applicant or employee’s personal electronic accounts.
New York employers must now comply with a new privacy law in effect. Specifically, employers are prohibited from obtaining certain information and/or access to an applicant or employee’s personal electronic accounts.
As this election year heads into full gear, many nonprofit organizations will have questions about the types of advocacy, policy, lobbying, fundraising, outreach and electoral activities they and their employees may undertake to promote their mission and policy objectives.
As this election year heads into full gear, many nonprofit organizations will have questions about the types of advocacy, policy, lobbying, fundraising, outreach and electoral activities they and their employees may undertake to promote their mission and policy objectives.
On December 26, 2023, the NLRB put into effect sweeping new rules providing unions with a rocket-speed advantage in petitioning for a representation election. The new rules once again collapse the time between the filing of a representation petition for an election (an employee vote whether employees want to be union-represented) and the date an election is conducted.
On December 26, 2023, the NLRB put into effect sweeping new rules providing unions with a rocket-speed advantage in petitioning for a representation election. The new rules once again collapse the time between the filing of a representation petition for an election (an employee vote whether employees want to be union-represented) and the date an election is conducted.
On February 14, 2024, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) Wage and Hour Division Administrator, Jessica Looman, testified before the House and confirmed the DOL’s intention to release its new overtime rule (the Rule) in April 2024, despite Republican representatives urging the DOL to withdraw a proposed overtime rule.
On February 14, 2024, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) Wage and Hour Division Administrator, Jessica Looman, testified before the House and confirmed the DOL’s intention to release its new overtime rule (the Rule) in April 2024, despite Republican representatives urging the DOL to withdraw a proposed overtime rule.
On February 5, 2024, the NLRB ruled that Dartmouth University’s Men’s Basketball team players are employees of the school, within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act, clearing the way for an election that may result in the first-ever certified labor union for NCAA athletes.
On February 5, 2024, the NLRB ruled that Dartmouth University’s Men’s Basketball team players are employees of the school, within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act, clearing the way for an election that may result in the first-ever certified labor union for NCAA athletes.
On February 2, 2024, the US Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) issued a Final Rule relating to the FY2025 H-1B visa lottery program, set to open for registration next month. The new rule implements a “beneficiary centric” system, that will ensure that each unique beneficiary will be entered into the system only once, regardless of how many employers may submit a registration on the beneficiary’s behalf.
On February 2, 2024, the US Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) issued a Final Rule relating to the FY2025 H-1B visa lottery program, set to open for registration next month. The new rule implements a “beneficiary centric” system, that will ensure that each unique beneficiary will be entered into the system only once, regardless of how many employers may submit a registration on the beneficiary’s behalf.
Over the past decade, and especially recently, more and more state legislatures have passed paid leave laws providing for tax-funded paid medical and/or family leave programs. These new programs provide leave for employees above and beyond the normal “PTO,” “Vacation,” or “Sick” leave employers generally afford their employees.
Over the past decade, and especially recently, more and more state legislatures have passed paid leave laws providing for tax-funded paid medical and/or family leave programs. These new programs provide leave for employees above and beyond the normal “PTO,” “Vacation,” or “Sick” leave employers generally afford their employees.
Employment laws seem to be enacted in waves. One year its laws regulating how employers can and cannot react to or control an employee’s use of social media. Then, there is a wave of laws mandating paid sick leave. Of course, there is the evolving wave of laws about facial recognition and data privacy.
Employment laws seem to be enacted in waves. One year its laws regulating how employers can and cannot react to or control an employee’s use of social media. Then, there is a wave of laws mandating paid sick leave. Of course, there is the evolving wave of laws about facial recognition and data privacy.
On January 10, 2024, the Department of Labor (DOL) published its final Rule on classifying workers as independent contractors under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The Rule will take effect on March 11, 2024.
On January 10, 2024, the Department of Labor (DOL) published its final Rule on classifying workers as independent contractors under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The Rule will take effect on March 11, 2024.
On December 22, 2023, New York Governor Kathy Hochul gave a holiday gift to New York’s business community when she vetoed New York State Senate bill (S.3100A)—New York’s non-compete bill—that would have prohibited employers in New York from using noncompete agreements and certain other restrictive covenants with employees and other “covered individuals,” amending New York’s Labor Law. The business community lobbied for the Governor to veto or narrow the bill, fearing that the non-compete bill, in the form passed by the New York legislature, would damage New York’s economy, threatening innovation and causing businesses to flee New York for more employer-friendly states.
On December 22, 2023, New York Governor Kathy Hochul gave a holiday gift to New York’s business community when she vetoed New York State Senate bill (S.3100A)—New York’s non-compete bill—that would have prohibited employers in New York from using noncompete agreements and certain other restrictive covenants with employees and other “covered individuals,” amending New York’s Labor Law. The business community lobbied for the Governor to veto or narrow the bill, fearing that the non-compete bill, in the form passed by the New York legislature, would damage New York’s economy, threatening innovation and causing businesses to flee New York for more employer-friendly states.
Non-compete agreements have been the subject of much discussion and scrutiny across the country. While some states and federal agencies push for prohibition of these types of restrictive covenants altogether, Maryland and New York continue their trends of narrowing the class of workers who may be lawfully subjected to a non-compete. Non-Compete Agreements have been the subject of much discussion and scrutiny across the country. While some states and federal agencies push for prohibition of these types of restrictive covenants altogether, Maryland and New York continue their trends of narrowing the class of workers who may be lawfully subjected to a non-compete.
Non-compete agreements have been the subject of much discussion and scrutiny across the country. While some states and federal agencies push for prohibition of these types of restrictive covenants altogether, Maryland and New York continue their trends of narrowing the class of workers who may be lawfully subjected to a non-compete. Non-Compete Agreements have been the subject of much discussion and scrutiny across the country. While some states and federal agencies push for prohibition of these types of restrictive covenants altogether, Maryland and New York continue their trends of narrowing the class of workers who may be lawfully subjected to a non-compete.
This webinar discusses what certain states and federal agencies are doing to attempt to limit or prohibit the use of non-competes and practical considerations for employers in light of these recent developments.
This webinar discusses what certain states and federal agencies are doing to attempt to limit or prohibit the use of non-competes and practical considerations for employers in light of these recent developments.
Last week, the Department of Labor announced it had recovered $11.4 million in back wages and liquidated damages for more than 1,000 employees of a popular Mexican Restaurant chain, Plaza Azteca. Following an investigation that began in 2019, the Department of Labor filed a lawsuit against the owner of several Plaza Azteca locations alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”).
Last week, the Department of Labor announced it had recovered $11.4 million in back wages and liquidated damages for more than 1,000 employees of a popular Mexican Restaurant chain, Plaza Azteca. Following an investigation that began in 2019, the Department of Labor filed a lawsuit against the owner of several Plaza Azteca locations alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”).
As of November 22, 2023, employers of New York City employees and New York City places of public accommodation and housing providers are prohibited from discriminating based on an individual’s height or weight, with limited exceptions, following an amendment to New York City’s Human Rights Law.
As of November 22, 2023, employers of New York City employees and New York City places of public accommodation and housing providers are prohibited from discriminating based on an individual’s height or weight, with limited exceptions, following an amendment to New York City’s Human Rights Law.
We’ve seen it happen: an acrimonious termination results in a terminated employee refusing to return a company-issued laptop computer or other electronic device, claiming it contains personal information. In a recent Maryland criminal law case, State v. McConnell (July 17, 2023), the Maryland Supreme Court gave strong ear to an employee’s claim of privacy entitlement to information stored on a provided laptop, stating that computers “can reveal the sum of an individual’s private life.”
We’ve seen it happen: an acrimonious termination results in a terminated employee refusing to return a company-issued laptop computer or other electronic device, claiming it contains personal information. In a recent Maryland criminal law case, State v. McConnell (July 17, 2023), the Maryland Supreme Court gave strong ear to an employee’s claim of privacy entitlement to information stored on a provided laptop, stating that computers “can reveal the sum of an individual’s private life.”
Eleventh Circuit Joins Third, Seventh, and Ninth Circuits in Ruling That USERRA Requires Paid Military Leave When Employer Provides Paid Leave For “Comparable” Absences
Change to Maryland’s Cannabis Laws Raises Questions for Employers
An Early Report on How The Supreme Court’s Affirmative Action Admissions Policies Decision Is Impacting The Private Sector
Supreme Court Toughens Standard In Religious Accommodation Cases
The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act: What Employers Should Know
Eleventh Circuit Joins Third, Seventh, and Ninth Circuits in Ruling That USERRA Requires Paid Military Leave When Employer Provides Paid Leave For “Comparable” Absences
Change to Maryland’s Cannabis Laws Raises Questions for Employers
An Early Report on How The Supreme Court’s Affirmative Action Admissions Policies Decision Is Impacting The Private Sector
Supreme Court Toughens Standard In Religious Accommodation Cases
The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act: What Employers Should Know
As of July 1st, Maryland law now permits the possession and use of small amounts of marijuana. Unlike some other jurisdictions that have decriminalized marijuana possession, Maryland’s new statute does not directly address the law’s consequences for employers and employees. In the absence of statutory language clarifying the law’s impact on the workplace, many Maryland employers have been left uncertain as to their ability to prohibit, or test for, marijuana use among their employees.
As of July 1st, Maryland law now permits the possession and use of small amounts of marijuana. Unlike some other jurisdictions that have decriminalized marijuana possession, Maryland’s new statute does not directly address the law’s consequences for employers and employees. In the absence of statutory language clarifying the law’s impact on the workplace, many Maryland employers have been left uncertain as to their ability to prohibit, or test for, marijuana use among their employees.
A growing number of federal appeals courts are ruling that the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act ("USERRA") requires employers to provide employees on military leave with the “same rights and benefits” as are provided to similarly situated employees on non-military leave.
A growing number of federal appeals courts are ruling that the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act ("USERRA") requires employers to provide employees on military leave with the “same rights and benefits” as are provided to similarly situated employees on non-military leave.
This past June, the Supreme Court issued a decision “clarifying” the test applied to determine when an employer would be justified in refusing a requested religious accommodation. Under Title VII, an employer may not discriminate against an employee or applicant on account of their religion. In regulations issued not long thereafter, the EEOC added its interpretation that this non-discrimination provision also required an employer to “make reasonable accommodations to the religious needs of employees” whenever those accommodations would not work an “undue hardship on the conduct of the employer’s business.” This interpretation was then adopted by Congress when it amended the statute in 1972. The term “religion” was also further defined to include “all aspects of religious observance and practice, as well as belief.”
This past June, the Supreme Court issued a decision “clarifying” the test applied to determine when an employer would be justified in refusing a requested religious accommodation. Under Title VII, an employer may not discriminate against an employee or applicant on account of their religion. In regulations issued not long thereafter, the EEOC added its interpretation that this non-discrimination provision also required an employer to “make reasonable accommodations to the religious needs of employees” whenever those accommodations would not work an “undue hardship on the conduct of the employer’s business.” This interpretation was then adopted by Congress when it amended the statute in 1972. The term “religion” was also further defined to include “all aspects of religious observance and practice, as well as belief.”
On June 27, 2023, the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (“PWFA”) became law, placing heightened obligations upon employers to accommodate pregnant employees. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) immediately began accepting charges under the PWFA for alleged violations occurring on or after June 27, 2023.
On June 27, 2023, the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (“PWFA”) became law, placing heightened obligations upon employers to accommodate pregnant employees. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) immediately began accepting charges under the PWFA for alleged violations occurring on or after June 27, 2023.
On August 30, 2023, the US Department of Labor, Wage and Hour Division, issued a notice of proposed rulemaking increasing the requirements for claiming overtime exemptions for Executive, Administrative and Professional employees, commonly referred to as the “White Collar Overtime Exemptions.” Currently, a White Collar employee can only be overtime-exempt (that is, paid on a flat salary basis without overtime) if the employee performs certain functions requiring judgment and discretion, and is paid at least $684 per week, approximately $35,600 annualized.
On August 30, 2023, the US Department of Labor, Wage and Hour Division, issued a notice of proposed rulemaking increasing the requirements for claiming overtime exemptions for Executive, Administrative and Professional employees, commonly referred to as the “White Collar Overtime Exemptions.” Currently, a White Collar employee can only be overtime-exempt (that is, paid on a flat salary basis without overtime) if the employee performs certain functions requiring judgment and discretion, and is paid at least $684 per week, approximately $35,600 annualized.
In a decision issued on August 2, 2023, the NLRB overruled existing precedent regarding the lawfulness of employer work rules and policies as articulated in employee handbooks, in favor of a new test which places the burden on employers to justify presumptively unlawful policies by showing that the work rules or policies advance a legitimate and substantial business interest that cannot be achieved by a more narrowly tailored rule.
In a decision issued on August 2, 2023, the NLRB overruled existing precedent regarding the lawfulness of employer work rules and policies as articulated in employee handbooks, in favor of a new test which places the burden on employers to justify presumptively unlawful policies by showing that the work rules or policies advance a legitimate and substantial business interest that cannot be achieved by a more narrowly tailored rule.
This webinar discusses the new Form I-9 and walks participants through the form and proper verification process. It also address new proposed regulations on remote verification procedures, who is eligible and who is not, and the implication of those changes for employers going forward.
This webinar discusses the new Form I-9 and walks participants through the form and proper verification process. It also address new proposed regulations on remote verification procedures, who is eligible and who is not, and the implication of those changes for employers going forward.
On July 21, 2023, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced a new Form I-9 to be used in connection with the verification of employment eligibility. The new form is available for use effective as of August 1, 2023. Employers may continue to use the older version of the Form I-9 (Rev. 10/21/19) through Oct. 31, 2023. After that date, they must use the new form. Use of an older version of the form will subject employers to penalties under Section 274A of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended.
On July 21, 2023, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced a new Form I-9 to be used in connection with the verification of employment eligibility. The new form is available for use effective as of August 1, 2023. Employers may continue to use the older version of the Form I-9 (Rev. 10/21/19) through Oct. 31, 2023. After that date, they must use the new form. Use of an older version of the form will subject employers to penalties under Section 274A of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended.
On February 22nd, the Supreme Court ruled that an executive or managerial employee otherwise qualified to be overtime exempt, lost that exemption if paid on a daily rate basis.
As background, highly compensated employees, those identified as “Executive” or “Administrative” under the Federal Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), can be overtime exempt if performing certain high level functions, and if paid on a “salaried basis.” At issue, the U.S. Supreme Court addressed whether an individual, otherwise entitled to exempt status, loses that status if paid on a daily pay basis – that is whether daily paid individuals are receiving a “salary.”
On February 22nd, the Supreme Court ruled that an executive or managerial employee otherwise qualified to be overtime exempt, lost that exemption if paid on a daily rate basis.
As background, highly compensated employees, those identified as “Executive” or “Administrative” under the Federal Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), can be overtime exempt if performing certain high level functions, and if paid on a “salaried basis.” At issue, the U.S. Supreme Court addressed whether an individual, otherwise entitled to exempt status, loses that status if paid on a daily pay basis – that is whether daily paid individuals are receiving a “salary.”
On January 5, 2023, The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) proposed a new rule that would ban essentially all non-compete agreements that employers impose on their workers. The notice of proposed rulemaking would deem any non-compete clauses with paid staff and independent contractors, as well as unpaid workers, to be an unfair method of competition that must be rescinded and that employers must tell current and former employees they've stopped enforcement.
On January 5, 2023, The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) proposed a new rule that would ban essentially all non-compete agreements that employers impose on their workers. The notice of proposed rulemaking would deem any non-compete clauses with paid staff and independent contractors, as well as unpaid workers, to be an unfair method of competition that must be rescinded and that employers must tell current and former employees they've stopped enforcement.
On December 15, 2022, The National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) handed down a finding of merit in Case 31-CA-290326 brought by the National College Players Association (“NCPA”) on behalf of men’s and women’s basketball and football players that charged the University of Southern California (“USC”), the PAC-12 Conference (“PAC-12”) and the National Collegiate Athletics Association (“NCAA”) with an unfair labor practice, alleging they had systematically misclassified players as “student-athlete” nonemployees instead of employees to prevent the athletes from realizing their rights under the National Labor Relations Act.
On December 15, 2022, The National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) handed down a finding of merit in Case 31-CA-290326 brought by the National College Players Association (“NCPA”) on behalf of men’s and women’s basketball and football players that charged the University of Southern California (“USC”), the PAC-12 Conference (“PAC-12”) and the National Collegiate Athletics Association (“NCAA”) with an unfair labor practice, alleging they had systematically misclassified players as “student-athlete” nonemployees instead of employees to prevent the athletes from realizing their rights under the National Labor Relations Act.
U.S. trade and professional organizations periodically encounter inquiries from foreign nationals looking for support for a visa application for the United States. The individual is invariably asking for the organization to provide them with a “recommendation” or “opinion” letter to support their O-1 visa application. The inquiry usually raises multiple questions for the organization -- Are we required to provide the letter? What happens if we say yes (or no) to the request? Will the immigration service investigate us if we provide the letter? - and so on. In other cases, the organization is looking more for guidance on how to set limits on such “recommendations,” given that most of the individuals who come to them are not members of the organization.
U.S. trade and professional organizations periodically encounter inquiries from foreign nationals looking for support for a visa application for the United States. The individual is invariably asking for the organization to provide them with a “recommendation” or “opinion” letter to support their O-1 visa application. The inquiry usually raises multiple questions for the organization -- Are we required to provide the letter? What happens if we say yes (or no) to the request? Will the immigration service investigate us if we provide the letter? - and so on. In other cases, the organization is looking more for guidance on how to set limits on such “recommendations,” given that most of the individuals who come to them are not members of the organization.
The Time to Care Act of 2022 specifies that the Maryland Department of Labor must adopt regulations to implement the bill by June 1, 2023, which includes establishing a paid leave fund that collects contributions from employers and employees based on wages.
The Time to Care Act of 2022 specifies that the Maryland Department of Labor must adopt regulations to implement the bill by June 1, 2023, which includes establishing a paid leave fund that collects contributions from employers and employees based on wages.
The Offer of Employment letter serves many purposes. The letter must enhance the applicant’s interest in the opportunity and protect the employer against claims that it misrepresented the employment opportunity.
The Offer of Employment letter serves many purposes. The letter must enhance the applicant’s interest in the opportunity and protect the employer against claims that it misrepresented the employment opportunity.
During the course of the pandemic, IT departments were overwhelmed by the pressing need to provide employees with remote access in a very short time. That need may have, in some cases, overridden established processes and procedures around data security.
During the course of the pandemic, IT departments were overwhelmed by the pressing need to provide employees with remote access in a very short time. That need may have, in some cases, overridden established processes and procedures around data security.
The rise of remote work comes with potential liability, requiring employers to examine the scope of their existing insurance coverage and to explore additional options for coverage. Remote working generally implicates three forms of business and employer-liability insurance: (1) worker’s compensation; (2) cyber-insurance; and (3) commercial property insurance.
The rise of remote work comes with potential liability, requiring employers to examine the scope of their existing insurance coverage and to explore additional options for coverage. Remote working generally implicates three forms of business and employer-liability insurance: (1) worker’s compensation; (2) cyber-insurance; and (3) commercial property insurance.
Although many employees have returned to working on location again, factors indicate that the labor market has changed to more permanently accommodate remote workers. With this shift comes state tax and other employment issues employers must now contend with. This article focuses on some of the state tax issues.
Although many employees have returned to working on location again, factors indicate that the labor market has changed to more permanently accommodate remote workers. With this shift comes state tax and other employment issues employers must now contend with. This article focuses on some of the state tax issues.
Overnight, literally millions of employees became remote workers with employers scrambling just to keep the doors open. There was no time to prepare guidelines describing the expectations and unique challenges of the new remote environment. But there is time now, and the well-advised employer should do so.
Overnight, literally millions of employees became remote workers with employers scrambling just to keep the doors open. There was no time to prepare guidelines describing the expectations and unique challenges of the new remote environment. But there is time now, and the well-advised employer should do so.
On January 25, 2022, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”), announced they were formally withdrawing its emergency temporary standard requiring employers with more than 100 employees require their employees to receive the COVID-19 vaccine.
On January 25, 2022, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”), announced they were formally withdrawing its emergency temporary standard requiring employers with more than 100 employees require their employees to receive the COVID-19 vaccine.
The Sixth Circuit lifted the stay on OSHA’s vaccine or test mandate for employers with 100 or more employees. The Fifth Circuit stayed the mandate pending a review of whether the coronavirus presented a “grave danger” necessitating such sweeping federal action a day after the rules were published. With the stay lifted, employers are left revisiting the requirements of the mandate.
The Sixth Circuit lifted the stay on OSHA’s vaccine or test mandate for employers with 100 or more employees. The Fifth Circuit stayed the mandate pending a review of whether the coronavirus presented a “grave danger” necessitating such sweeping federal action a day after the rules were published. With the stay lifted, employers are left revisiting the requirements of the mandate.
Being a government contractor is hard; the rules are complex, and the penalties for non-compliance can be harsh. So, when the President of the United States tells the world that there will be a vaccine mandate for U.S. government contractors, contractors might have some questions.
Being a government contractor is hard; the rules are complex, and the penalties for non-compliance can be harsh. So, when the President of the United States tells the world that there will be a vaccine mandate for U.S. government contractors, contractors might have some questions.
Employers can no longer rely on their contracts, policies, or industry standards as grounds for seeking a private suit against employees under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986 (CFAA). The Supreme Court recently ruled that the CFAA did not regulate a person's authorized access to a computer for an improper purpose. The Court limited claims under the CFAA to a person who exceeds his/her authorized access.
Employers can no longer rely on their contracts, policies, or industry standards as grounds for seeking a private suit against employees under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986 (CFAA). The Supreme Court recently ruled that the CFAA did not regulate a person's authorized access to a computer for an improper purpose. The Court limited claims under the CFAA to a person who exceeds his/her authorized access.
Few issues are more sensitive for employers than accommodating employees’ religious practices and observances. In recent years, Muslim employees and their employers have struggled with how to handle the religious requirement to perform obligatory prayers while at work.
Few issues are more sensitive for employers than accommodating employees’ religious practices and observances. In recent years, Muslim employees and their employers have struggled with how to handle the religious requirement to perform obligatory prayers while at work.
In the close geographic quarters of the District of Columbia, non-compete agreements were a common tool for employers seeking to protect their business from former employees going to work for competitors. Now, employees cannot be bound by such covenants not to compete, and are generally free to take up shop with the competitor across the street. This new law will inevitably change the landscape of DC employment practices.
In the close geographic quarters of the District of Columbia, non-compete agreements were a common tool for employers seeking to protect their business from former employees going to work for competitors. Now, employees cannot be bound by such covenants not to compete, and are generally free to take up shop with the competitor across the street. This new law will inevitably change the landscape of DC employment practices.
As a chartered county, Montgomery County has the discretion to determine what actionable discrimination is under County law. As such, effective January 15, 2021, the County Council for Montgomery County, Maryland passed Bill 14-20 which updated the County’s Human Rights law to define harassment, including sexual harassment.
As a chartered county, Montgomery County has the discretion to determine what actionable discrimination is under County law. As such, effective January 15, 2021, the County Council for Montgomery County, Maryland passed Bill 14-20 which updated the County’s Human Rights law to define harassment, including sexual harassment.
Every winter, Virginia’s General Assembly gathers in Richmond to pass new laws affecting Virginians and Virginia businesses. Three of the most recent and consequential changes affecting employers are changes to Virginia’s minimum wage, paid sick leave to certain employees, and prohibition on disciplining employees for medicinal use of cannabis oil.
Every winter, Virginia’s General Assembly gathers in Richmond to pass new laws affecting Virginians and Virginia businesses. Three of the most recent and consequential changes affecting employers are changes to Virginia’s minimum wage, paid sick leave to certain employees, and prohibition on disciplining employees for medicinal use of cannabis oil.
In the coming months, association leaders will need to evaluate a range of legal questions and practical concerns as they consider establishing a COVID-19 vaccination policy for their workplace and events. Here are some of the key issues that any association should consider before implementing a vaccine policy.
In the coming months, association leaders will need to evaluate a range of legal questions and practical concerns as they consider establishing a COVID-19 vaccination policy for their workplace and events. Here are some of the key issues that any association should consider before implementing a vaccine policy.
With two coronavirus vaccines having been approved for emergency use, many employers are considering if compulsory vaccination is the best path. This webinar will review the recent EEOC guidance in regard to these vaccines and consider the implications of merely encouraging or mandating employees to get vaccinated.
With two coronavirus vaccines having been approved for emergency use, many employers are considering if compulsory vaccination is the best path. This webinar will review the recent EEOC guidance in regard to these vaccines and consider the implications of merely encouraging or mandating employees to get vaccinated.
As COVID-19 vaccines become available, employers will confront the question of whether to mandate such vaccinations for their workforce. This short video walks employers through the various questions they should consider in formulating a policy on vaccinations and some of the legal considerations when doing so.
As COVID-19 vaccines become available, employers will confront the question of whether to mandate such vaccinations for their workforce. This short video walks employers through the various questions they should consider in formulating a policy on vaccinations and some of the legal considerations when doing so.
An employee responds to a racially derogatory social media post with a thumbs up. A customer complains that a clerk’s BLM mask is offensive. A tech CEO blasts a political endorsement to the millions of employees of client companies. Each of these scenarios presents an additional challenge to an employer already navigating the difficulties imposed by a once in a generation health crisis, and an increasingly polarized political climate.
An employee responds to a racially derogatory social media post with a thumbs up. A customer complains that a clerk’s BLM mask is offensive. A tech CEO blasts a political endorsement to the millions of employees of client companies. Each of these scenarios presents an additional challenge to an employer already navigating the difficulties imposed by a once in a generation health crisis, and an increasingly polarized political climate.
Around this time of any election year, we encounter employer inquiries as to whether employers have an obligation to provide employees with “voting time leave” and if so, whether that time must be paid.
Around this time of any election year, we encounter employer inquiries as to whether employers have an obligation to provide employees with “voting time leave” and if so, whether that time must be paid.
On August 8, 2020, President Trump sent a memorandum (the “Memorandum”) to the Treasury Department (“Treasury”), ordering the Secretary of the Treasury to defer collection of the employee portion of Social Security withholding (and withholding for certain railroad workers under the Railroad Retirement Tax Act) from September 1, 2020, through December 31, 2020.
On August 8, 2020, President Trump sent a memorandum (the “Memorandum”) to the Treasury Department (“Treasury”), ordering the Secretary of the Treasury to defer collection of the employee portion of Social Security withholding (and withholding for certain railroad workers under the Railroad Retirement Tax Act) from September 1, 2020, through December 31, 2020.
On Wednesday, July 15, 2020, the Virginia Safety and Health Codes Board (“Board”) of the Virginia Department of Labor and Industry (“VDOLI”) met to discuss and adopt workplace safety regulations (16 VAC 25-220) proposed by VDOLI on June 12, 2020 in response to the SARS-CoV-2 virus (“Virus”) that causes COVID-19. This meeting was the final meeting in a series of meetings held by the Board to discuss the originally-proposed regulations. During this time, multiple amendments to these regulations were proposed by Board members.
On Wednesday, July 15, 2020, the Virginia Safety and Health Codes Board (“Board”) of the Virginia Department of Labor and Industry (“VDOLI”) met to discuss and adopt workplace safety regulations (16 VAC 25-220) proposed by VDOLI on June 12, 2020 in response to the SARS-CoV-2 virus (“Virus”) that causes COVID-19. This meeting was the final meeting in a series of meetings held by the Board to discuss the originally-proposed regulations. During this time, multiple amendments to these regulations were proposed by Board members.
Effective July 1, 2020, the Virginia Values Act amends and drastically rewrites the Virginia Human Rights Act (“VHRA”), adding substantial teeth to the statute. Among its key provisions, the Virginia Values Act expands the definition of covered employers, expands the causes of action available to aggrieved employees, increases the classes of employees who are protected, and expands the remedies available to employees who sue. With the substantial changes, it is anticipated that employers will see a flood of new litigation under the VHRA.
Effective July 1, 2020, the Virginia Values Act amends and drastically rewrites the Virginia Human Rights Act (“VHRA”), adding substantial teeth to the statute. Among its key provisions, the Virginia Values Act expands the definition of covered employers, expands the causes of action available to aggrieved employees, increases the classes of employees who are protected, and expands the remedies available to employees who sue. With the substantial changes, it is anticipated that employers will see a flood of new litigation under the VHRA.
Virginia employers who have or are considering non-compete agreements with low-wage earners should take note. Effective July 1, 2020, Virginia employers are prohibited by statute from entering into, enforcing, or threatening to enforce a covenant not to compete with any low-wage employee. See Va. Code § 40.1-28.7:8(B).
Virginia employers who have or are considering non-compete agreements with low-wage earners should take note. Effective July 1, 2020, Virginia employers are prohibited by statute from entering into, enforcing, or threatening to enforce a covenant not to compete with any low-wage employee. See Va. Code § 40.1-28.7:8(B).
On March 10, 2020, Governor Ralph Northam signed into law an amendment to the Virginia Wage Payment Act (“WPA”) passed by the Virginia General Assembly, which will go into effect on July 1, 2020.
On March 10, 2020, Governor Ralph Northam signed into law an amendment to the Virginia Wage Payment Act (“WPA”) passed by the Virginia General Assembly, which will go into effect on July 1, 2020.
On Wednesday, June 24, 2020, the Virginia Safety and Health Codes Board (“Board”) of the Virginia Department of Labor and Industry met to discuss the adoption of the proposed COVID-19 workplace safety regulations previously highlighted in our June 18 Client Alert below. The Board did not vote on the proposed regulations, but addressed several procedural matters moving the Board closer to approving new regulations in the near future. The Board anticipates holding another meeting the week of June 29, 2020 where it may vote on approving final regulations, although a meeting date has not been announced.
On Wednesday, June 24, 2020, the Virginia Safety and Health Codes Board (“Board”) of the Virginia Department of Labor and Industry met to discuss the adoption of the proposed COVID-19 workplace safety regulations previously highlighted in our June 18 Client Alert below. The Board did not vote on the proposed regulations, but addressed several procedural matters moving the Board closer to approving new regulations in the near future. The Board anticipates holding another meeting the week of June 29, 2020 where it may vote on approving final regulations, although a meeting date has not been announced.
Right now, employees may be experiencing anxiety and feeling excluded as result of Stay-at-Home Orders issued in various states to address the coronavirus pandemic. These feelings may linger once those Orders are lifted and we resume a new normal in the workplace. As such, employers, including those in leadership and management positions, must be aware of these feelings and avoid actions that may further exclude employees. This includes, but is not limited to, recognizing the importance of pronouns in the workplace.
Right now, employees may be experiencing anxiety and feeling excluded as result of Stay-at-Home Orders issued in various states to address the coronavirus pandemic. These feelings may linger once those Orders are lifted and we resume a new normal in the workplace. As such, employers, including those in leadership and management positions, must be aware of these feelings and avoid actions that may further exclude employees. This includes, but is not limited to, recognizing the importance of pronouns in the workplace.
In light of the current state of affairs surrounding COVID-19, employers are facing challenges not typically encountered in their day-to-day roles. Our Whiteford professionals have addressed questions for our clients in hopes these answers will assist in easing how to deal with this particularly difficult, ever-changing situation.
In light of the current state of affairs surrounding COVID-19, employers are facing challenges not typically encountered in their day-to-day roles. Our Whiteford professionals have addressed questions for our clients in hopes these answers will assist in easing how to deal with this particularly difficult, ever-changing situation.
On Friday, March 27th, the House of Representatives passed the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, which was previously passed by the Senate. The wide-ranging statute contains a host of provisions that will be importance to employers, including with respect to low-interest loan programs and other forms of financial relief.
On Friday, March 27th, the House of Representatives passed the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, which was previously passed by the Senate. The wide-ranging statute contains a host of provisions that will be importance to employers, including with respect to low-interest loan programs and other forms of financial relief.
On Monday, March 23, 2020, Governor Northam issued Executive Order 53 (“EO-53”) implementing a variety of state-wide “shutdown” measures intended to slow the spread of COVID-19. Governor Northam, through EO-53, ordered a number of private business to close from 11:59 p.m. on March 24, 2020 through 11:59 p.m. on April 23, 2020.
On Monday, March 23, 2020, Governor Northam issued Executive Order 53 (“EO-53”) implementing a variety of state-wide “shutdown” measures intended to slow the spread of COVID-19. Governor Northam, through EO-53, ordered a number of private business to close from 11:59 p.m. on March 24, 2020 through 11:59 p.m. on April 23, 2020.
On March 18th, the U.S. Senate approved the Families First Coronavirus Response Act, which was recently passed by the House of Representatives. The legislation now awaits signature by the President. Among a host of measures relating to health services and other forms of aid, the Act contains two new laws creating employee leave rights that will apply to a broad spectrum of employers. Under the terms of the new statute, these employee leave provisions will take effect within 15 days of the law being enacted. Below is brief overview of the key provisions of those two components of the Act.
On March 18th, the U.S. Senate approved the Families First Coronavirus Response Act, which was recently passed by the House of Representatives. The legislation now awaits signature by the President. Among a host of measures relating to health services and other forms of aid, the Act contains two new laws creating employee leave rights that will apply to a broad spectrum of employers. Under the terms of the new statute, these employee leave provisions will take effect within 15 days of the law being enacted. Below is brief overview of the key provisions of those two components of the Act.
Board members owe a duty to organization to act in good faith, with due care and loyalty to its interests. They likewise owe the organization confidentiality and must act to protect the organization from claims and liabilities where possible.
Board members owe a duty to organization to act in good faith, with due care and loyalty to its interests. They likewise owe the organization confidentiality and must act to protect the organization from claims and liabilities where possible.
It is so easy to fall into the trap: an employee comes to a member of the Board of Directors with a complaint about some job concern and gets the director to “bite.” Out of an understandable, or even noble, desire to be a fixer, a director may assure the employee that he will address the concern, and take care of it. But is that a good judgment response?
It is so easy to fall into the trap: an employee comes to a member of the Board of Directors with a complaint about some job concern and gets the director to “bite.” Out of an understandable, or even noble, desire to be a fixer, a director may assure the employee that he will address the concern, and take care of it. But is that a good judgment response?
On January 12, 2020, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) announced its Final Rule clarifying that employers must exercise “direct control” over employees to be a joint employer under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The Rule is good news for employers; it sets a higher standard for plaintiffs seeking additional defendants in a wage and hour claim. Employers who use staffing agencies, have franchise relationships, or use subcontractors will want to take special note.
On January 12, 2020, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) announced its Final Rule clarifying that employers must exercise “direct control” over employees to be a joint employer under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The Rule is good news for employers; it sets a higher standard for plaintiffs seeking additional defendants in a wage and hour claim. Employers who use staffing agencies, have franchise relationships, or use subcontractors will want to take special note.
Under the Universal Paid Leave Act (“UPLA”), beginning in July 2020, employees in the District of Columbia will have the option of taking three types of paid leave: up to eight weeks of parental paid leave taken within a year of giving birth, placing a child in adoption or foster care, or changing the custody of a child; up to six weeks of family paid leave to care for or provide companionship to a seriously ill family member; and up to two weeks of medical paid leave after the employee is diagnosed with or had an occurrence of a serious health condition.
Under the Universal Paid Leave Act (“UPLA”), beginning in July 2020, employees in the District of Columbia will have the option of taking three types of paid leave: up to eight weeks of parental paid leave taken within a year of giving birth, placing a child in adoption or foster care, or changing the custody of a child; up to six weeks of family paid leave to care for or provide companionship to a seriously ill family member; and up to two weeks of medical paid leave after the employee is diagnosed with or had an occurrence of a serious health condition.
Recently enacted amendments to Maryland’s anti-discrimination laws go into effect today, October 1, 2019, which will have a wide impact on Maryland employers and their ability to defend against sexual harassment claims.
Recently enacted amendments to Maryland’s anti-discrimination laws go into effect today, October 1, 2019, which will have a wide impact on Maryland employers and their ability to defend against sexual harassment claims.
On September 24, 2019, the U.S. Department of Labor issued its final version of the much anticipated overtime exemption rule, raising the minimum salary threshold required to qualify for the Fair Labor Standards Act’s (FLSA) “white collar” exemptions to $35,568 per year, or $684 per week.
On September 24, 2019, the U.S. Department of Labor issued its final version of the much anticipated overtime exemption rule, raising the minimum salary threshold required to qualify for the Fair Labor Standards Act’s (FLSA) “white collar” exemptions to $35,568 per year, or $684 per week.
As of July 1, 2019, employers in Virginia must furnish to employees and former employees copies of all records retained by the employer in the following categories:
the employee’s dates of employment with the employer
the employee’s wages or salary during the employment
the employee’s job description and job title during employment
any injuries sustained by the employee during the course of the employment with the employer (Virginia Code §8.01-413.1(B)).
As of July 1, 2019, employers in Virginia must furnish to employees and former employees copies of all records retained by the employer in the following categories:
the employee’s dates of employment with the employer
the employee’s wages or salary during the employment
the employee’s job description and job title during employment
any injuries sustained by the employee during the course of the employment with the employer (Virginia Code §8.01-413.1(B)).
The recent news of athletic department recruitment scandals - accepting bribes to gain admissions using dedicated roster spots for non-athletes - and for the practice to so easily escape detection is diagnostic of a greater issue within the results-oriented world of collegiate athletics.[1] An environment conducive to ethical misconduct may exist where rules are stretched, improprieties are overlooked and whistleblowing only occurs at great personal risk, both for athletic department employees, as well as students. Inadequate oversight of unethical misconduct can result in severe consequences, such as the recent and tragic death of a University of Maryland athlete. In that case, an entire University Board was forced to functionally admit a major athletic program oversight. Schools and universities must take steps now to ensure that oversight of ethical misconduct, particularly in the athletic department, is being handled appropriately.
The recent news of athletic department recruitment scandals - accepting bribes to gain admissions using dedicated roster spots for non-athletes - and for the practice to so easily escape detection is diagnostic of a greater issue within the results-oriented world of collegiate athletics.[1] An environment conducive to ethical misconduct may exist where rules are stretched, improprieties are overlooked and whistleblowing only occurs at great personal risk, both for athletic department employees, as well as students. Inadequate oversight of unethical misconduct can result in severe consequences, such as the recent and tragic death of a University of Maryland athlete. In that case, an entire University Board was forced to functionally admit a major athletic program oversight. Schools and universities must take steps now to ensure that oversight of ethical misconduct, particularly in the athletic department, is being handled appropriately.
The issue of gender equality in sports is front and center. While not a new issue, recent lawsuits are challenging the practice of paying female athletes substantially less for similar work than male athletes.
In 2017, the history of gender inequity in sports was highlighted in the motion picture, Battle of the Sexes. The film depicted the epic, nationally televised, 1973 tennis match between female tennis star Billie Jean King and her male counterpart Bobby Riggs, portrayed as a male chauvinist. King was the first female tennis player to win over $100,000 in a year prior to this epic match. The tennis match between these players sent an important message that women deserved the same amount of prize money and respect as males. As set forth in this article, this message continues to resonate today in sports.
The issue of gender equality in sports is front and center. While not a new issue, recent lawsuits are challenging the practice of paying female athletes substantially less for similar work than male athletes.
In 2017, the history of gender inequity in sports was highlighted in the motion picture, Battle of the Sexes. The film depicted the epic, nationally televised, 1973 tennis match between female tennis star Billie Jean King and her male counterpart Bobby Riggs, portrayed as a male chauvinist. King was the first female tennis player to win over $100,000 in a year prior to this epic match. The tennis match between these players sent an important message that women deserved the same amount of prize money and respect as males. As set forth in this article, this message continues to resonate today in sports.
Peter D. Guattery presented a brief webinar on the topic of, "The Return of the Social Security No-Match Letter," where he addressed what it means and how it impacts your business.
Peter D. Guattery presented a brief webinar on the topic of, "The Return of the Social Security No-Match Letter," where he addressed what it means and how it impacts your business.
It is an understandable tendency to want one-size-fits-all policies and employment handbook provisions in the workplace, but the virtual workplace modality creates a need to re-examine that tendency. After all, the conditions at play in the virtual workplace involve issues of control and accountability not present when all employees are easily observed and reachable by merely walking the halls.
It is an understandable tendency to want one-size-fits-all policies and employment handbook provisions in the workplace, but the virtual workplace modality creates a need to re-examine that tendency. After all, the conditions at play in the virtual workplace involve issues of control and accountability not present when all employees are easily observed and reachable by merely walking the halls.
You are an employer located in Columbia, Maryland, with a mobile workforce, which travels to client sites around the state and into the District of Columbia and Pennsylvania. One of your employees, who regularly works between sites in Montgomery County and the District needs to be out because his child’s school has been closed by order of the county government. You look to your policies and see that your employee has no more paid vacation leave available, and only one day of sick leave left. Since your policy limits the use of sick leave to only those categories of leave permitted under Maryland law, you tell the employee that he will need to take a day of unpaid leave, because he is not eligible for paid sick leave.
You are an employer located in Columbia, Maryland, with a mobile workforce, which travels to client sites around the state and into the District of Columbia and Pennsylvania. One of your employees, who regularly works between sites in Montgomery County and the District needs to be out because his child’s school has been closed by order of the county government. You look to your policies and see that your employee has no more paid vacation leave available, and only one day of sick leave left. Since your policy limits the use of sick leave to only those categories of leave permitted under Maryland law, you tell the employee that he will need to take a day of unpaid leave, because he is not eligible for paid sick leave.
One of your valued employees comes to you with exciting news – her partner has been offered a big promotion, but it requires a move across country. She would love to continue working for your company and you would hate to have to replace her. So you both agree on a plan that allows her to continue to work remotely from her new state. Everyone is happy, until you learn about the unintended consequences of having a remote employee.
One of your valued employees comes to you with exciting news – her partner has been offered a big promotion, but it requires a move across country. She would love to continue working for your company and you would hate to have to replace her. So you both agree on a plan that allows her to continue to work remotely from her new state. Everyone is happy, until you learn about the unintended consequences of having a remote employee.
On January 23, David Stevens and Katelyn Brady presented a webinar addressing the five HR issues that are frequent stumbling blocks for employers seeking to maintain compliance and avoid costly litigation.
On January 23, David Stevens and Katelyn Brady presented a webinar addressing the five HR issues that are frequent stumbling blocks for employers seeking to maintain compliance and avoid costly litigation.
This one hour webinar will address five HR issues that are frequent stumbling blocks for employers seeking to maintain compliance and avoid costly litigation, with the last 10 minutes reserved for Q & A.
This one hour webinar will address five HR issues that are frequent stumbling blocks for employers seeking to maintain compliance and avoid costly litigation, with the last 10 minutes reserved for Q & A.
Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, and many similar State civil rights laws, the liability for sexual harassment can vary greatly based on the nature of the claim. The Supreme Court companion cases of Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775 (1998), and Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742 (1998) set out a standard holding an employer strictly liable for instances of sexual harassment by a supervisor, but left open a window, by way of an affirmative defense, where the employee suffered no tangible adverse employment action as a result.
Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, and many similar State civil rights laws, the liability for sexual harassment can vary greatly based on the nature of the claim. The Supreme Court companion cases of Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775 (1998), and Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742 (1998) set out a standard holding an employer strictly liable for instances of sexual harassment by a supervisor, but left open a window, by way of an affirmative defense, where the employee suffered no tangible adverse employment action as a result.
In light of the #MeToo movement, companies that have held holiday parties in the past are foregoing hosting holiday parties to avoid the potential for liability. However, concerns about #MeToo should not dissuade companies from celebrating staff, the holidays, and end-of-the-year accomplishments. Instead, companies should be proactive in planning holiday parties, as well as in educating employees about appropriate behavior, before hosting such parties to minimize risks. Below are suggested considerations for companies that do not want to forego throwing a holiday bash.
In light of the #MeToo movement, companies that have held holiday parties in the past are foregoing hosting holiday parties to avoid the potential for liability. However, concerns about #MeToo should not dissuade companies from celebrating staff, the holidays, and end-of-the-year accomplishments. Instead, companies should be proactive in planning holiday parties, as well as in educating employees about appropriate behavior, before hosting such parties to minimize risks. Below are suggested considerations for companies that do not want to forego throwing a holiday bash.
On May 30, Peter Guattery presented a webinar that outlined practical steps to assist employers in bringing existing leave policies in compliance with the new “Maryland Healthy Working Families Act.”
On May 30, Peter Guattery presented a webinar that outlined practical steps to assist employers in bringing existing leave policies in compliance with the new “Maryland Healthy Working Families Act.”
This webinar, sponsored by Whiteford, Taylor & Preston and LeadingAge Maryland, will outline practical steps which assist employers in bringing existing leave policies in compliance with the new “Maryland Healthy Working Families Act.” Topics will include: core provisions; accrual and carry over of leave; permissible uses of leave; recordkeeping obligations; and enforcement procedures.
This webinar, sponsored by Whiteford, Taylor & Preston and LeadingAge Maryland, will outline practical steps which assist employers in bringing existing leave policies in compliance with the new “Maryland Healthy Working Families Act.” Topics will include: core provisions; accrual and carry over of leave; permissible uses of leave; recordkeeping obligations; and enforcement procedures.
In the opening days of the 2018 legislative session, Maryland’s General Assembly overrode Governor Larry Hogan’s veto of the paid sick leave bill passed in 2017. Use of the veto override procedure meant that the law would take effect only 30 days after it was enacted, meaning that the law will become effective on February 11, 2018. During the final days before the law’s effective date, the General Assembly considered a bill to delay its effective date to July 1st, but the legislation appears unlikely to pass in the House of Delegates. As a result, mandatory sick leave will shortly become a reality in Maryland.
In the opening days of the 2018 legislative session, Maryland’s General Assembly overrode Governor Larry Hogan’s veto of the paid sick leave bill passed in 2017. Use of the veto override procedure meant that the law would take effect only 30 days after it was enacted, meaning that the law will become effective on February 11, 2018. During the final days before the law’s effective date, the General Assembly considered a bill to delay its effective date to July 1st, but the legislation appears unlikely to pass in the House of Delegates. As a result, mandatory sick leave will shortly become a reality in Maryland.
Following nearly a year of speculation, the Maryland General Assembly has voted to override Governor Larry Hogan’s veto of the paid sick leave bill passed by the General Assembly near the close of last year’s legislative session. The Maryland Healthy Working Families Act (HB 1/SB230) will now take effect in thirty days absent further action by the General Assembly to provide additional time to prepare for its implementation, and will have significant implications for Maryland employers.
Following nearly a year of speculation, the Maryland General Assembly has voted to override Governor Larry Hogan’s veto of the paid sick leave bill passed by the General Assembly near the close of last year’s legislative session. The Maryland Healthy Working Families Act (HB 1/SB230) will now take effect in thirty days absent further action by the General Assembly to provide additional time to prepare for its implementation, and will have significant implications for Maryland employers.
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston attorneys authored the most recent issue of the Maryland State Bar Association’s Labor & Employment Section Newsletter. Peter Guattery coordinated the effort for the Fall 2017 issue (attached) and contributed an article, as did: Steve Bers, Jennifer Jackman, Kevin McCormick, Tiffany Releford, Jeff Seaman, and David Stevens.
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston attorneys authored the most recent issue of the Maryland State Bar Association’s Labor & Employment Section Newsletter. Peter Guattery coordinated the effort for the Fall 2017 issue (attached) and contributed an article, as did: Steve Bers, Jennifer Jackman, Kevin McCormick, Tiffany Releford, Jeff Seaman, and David Stevens.
Effective September 18, 2017, all employers must use Form I-9 with a Revision Date of 7/17/2017 for verification of employment authorization of all newly hired employees. The new form contains minor changes to language on the form, largely renumbers the list of acceptable documents and updates list C documents to include the most current version of a certification or report of birth abroad to the U.S. Department of State.
Effective September 18, 2017, all employers must use Form I-9 with a Revision Date of 7/17/2017 for verification of employment authorization of all newly hired employees. The new form contains minor changes to language on the form, largely renumbers the list of acceptable documents and updates list C documents to include the most current version of a certification or report of birth abroad to the U.S. Department of State.
Join us on March 1 for an in-depth, timely webinar on what HR should do to prepare for and respond to “A Day Without” walkouts and strikes that could significantly impact the workplace.
Join us on March 1 for an in-depth, timely webinar on what HR should do to prepare for and respond to “A Day Without” walkouts and strikes that could significantly impact the workplace.
Many employers saw their ranks diminished on February 16 as a host of employees stayed away from work in support of the nationwide “A Day Without Immigrants” campaign.
Employers are likely to see that situation repeated as more protests are scheduled for the coming months. A walkout to support “A Day Without a Woman” is scheduled for March 8, and another “A Day Without Immigrants” is scheduled for May 1.
Many employers saw their ranks diminished on February 16 as a host of employees stayed away from work in support of the nationwide “A Day Without Immigrants” campaign.
Employers are likely to see that situation repeated as more protests are scheduled for the coming months. A walkout to support “A Day Without a Woman” is scheduled for March 8, and another “A Day Without Immigrants” is scheduled for May 1.
Clients are reminded that as of January 21, 2017, they must use the new Form I-9 for employment verification purposes. Failure to use the new form could result in a potential technical violation of the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), which became law in November 1986.
The new form contains a number of additional fields and a set of instructions which, at 15 pages, is more than double that of the prior form. In addition, USCIS has prepared a Smart Form, which may be accessed online, that should greatly aid in correct and thorough completion of the form.
Clients are reminded that as of January 21, 2017, they must use the new Form I-9 for employment verification purposes. Failure to use the new form could result in a potential technical violation of the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), which became law in November 1986.
The new form contains a number of additional fields and a set of instructions which, at 15 pages, is more than double that of the prior form. In addition, USCIS has prepared a Smart Form, which may be accessed online, that should greatly aid in correct and thorough completion of the form.
A federal district court has permanently blocked a U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) regulation that would have created new requirements for employers looking to keep unions out of their workplaces.
A federal district court has permanently blocked a U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) regulation that would have created new requirements for employers looking to keep unions out of their workplaces.
Tiffany Releford along with Lisa Scott from Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. will speak at a breakfast seminar for SHRM and HRCI credit titled “Breaking Up is Hard to Do: Terminating the Relationship,” part three of a three-part seminar series on the Employment Relationship.
For additional information, please contact events@wtplaw.com
Tiffany Releford along with Lisa Scott from Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. will speak at a breakfast seminar for SHRM and HRCI credit titled “Breaking Up is Hard to Do: Terminating the Relationship,” part three of a three-part seminar series on the Employment Relationship.
For additional information, please contact events@wtplaw.com
Maryland’s new Equal Pay for Equal Work Act, which takes effect on October 1, will prohibit employers from providing less than favorable employment opportunities to or discriminating against employees by paying different rates based on their sex or gender identity.
Maryland’s new Equal Pay for Equal Work Act, which takes effect on October 1, will prohibit employers from providing less than favorable employment opportunities to or discriminating against employees by paying different rates based on their sex or gender identity.
Effective December 1, 2016, the US Department of Labor regulations defining overtime-exemption eligibility requirements will change, with the impact upon employers being that fewer employees may be eligible for payment on a level salary basis for all hours worked – that is, employers may lose their overtime exemption. The new requirements will have a direct impact upon any current salaried employee being paid a salary of less than $913 per week.
Effective December 1, 2016, the US Department of Labor regulations defining overtime-exemption eligibility requirements will change, with the impact upon employers being that fewer employees may be eligible for payment on a level salary basis for all hours worked – that is, employers may lose their overtime exemption. The new requirements will have a direct impact upon any current salaried employee being paid a salary of less than $913 per week.
According to the DOL, reportable persuader activities would include any action, conduct, or communication by a consultant on behalf of an employer that would directly or indirectly persuade workers with regard to their rights to organize and bargain collectively, regardless of whether the consultant has direct contact with the workers. Any lawyer who works on written materials to be distributed to employees would be considered a persuader even if there is no direct contact between the lawyer and the employees. As a result, the lawyer’s fees generated for those activities must be disclosed.
According to the DOL, reportable persuader activities would include any action, conduct, or communication by a consultant on behalf of an employer that would directly or indirectly persuade workers with regard to their rights to organize and bargain collectively, regardless of whether the consultant has direct contact with the workers. Any lawyer who works on written materials to be distributed to employees would be considered a persuader even if there is no direct contact between the lawyer and the employees. As a result, the lawyer’s fees generated for those activities must be disclosed.
Please join Whiteford, Taylor & Preston and Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. for breakfast, SHRM and HRCI credit for “Courting and Hiring,” part one of a three-part seminar series on the Employment Relationship.
Please join Whiteford, Taylor & Preston and Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. for breakfast, SHRM and HRCI credit for “Courting and Hiring,” part one of a three-part seminar series on the Employment Relationship.
Just how the dismissal of the petition to unionize some Northwestern University football players will affect other representation issues before the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is uncertain, but one issue the Board didn’t touch is whether scholarship football players should be considered employees.
Just how the dismissal of the petition to unionize some Northwestern University football players will affect other representation issues before the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is uncertain, but one issue the Board didn’t touch is whether scholarship football players should be considered employees.
The D.C. Protecting Pregnant Workers Fairness Act of 2014 (“the Act”) became effective March 3, 2015. Under the Act, D.C. employers are required to provide accommodations, when requested, to employees when they are needed due to pregnancy, childbirth, related medical conditions or breastfeeding.
The D.C. Protecting Pregnant Workers Fairness Act of 2014 (“the Act”) became effective March 3, 2015. Under the Act, D.C. employers are required to provide accommodations, when requested, to employees when they are needed due to pregnancy, childbirth, related medical conditions or breastfeeding.
The D.C. Wage Theft Prevention Amendment Act of 2014 (WTPAA) became effective February 26, 2015. Under the WTPAA, all D.C. employers must provide new hires with specific information about their employment. Further, effective May 27, 2015, D.C. employers must provide all existing employees with updated information about their employment. This new notice requirement applies to all D.C. employers regardless of size. Both new hires and existing employees must be given notice of the terms and conditions of their employment in the format set forth in the Notice of Hire- Employment Status and Acknowledgement of Wage Rate(s) (Notice of Hire). A copy of the Notice of Hire can be found at the D.C. Depart of Employment Services website, http://does.dc.gov.
The D.C. Wage Theft Prevention Amendment Act of 2014 (WTPAA) became effective February 26, 2015. Under the WTPAA, all D.C. employers must provide new hires with specific information about their employment. Further, effective May 27, 2015, D.C. employers must provide all existing employees with updated information about their employment. This new notice requirement applies to all D.C. employers regardless of size. Both new hires and existing employees must be given notice of the terms and conditions of their employment in the format set forth in the Notice of Hire- Employment Status and Acknowledgement of Wage Rate(s) (Notice of Hire). A copy of the Notice of Hire can be found at the D.C. Depart of Employment Services website, http://does.dc.gov.
In World Color Corp. v. NLRB (D.C. Circuit No. 14-1028), the Court addressed a petition by a graphic printing company for review of a decision by the NLRB that the company’s employee hat policy violated the National Labor Relations Act (“the Act”). The employer’s policy prohibited the wearing of baseball caps other than company caps bearing the company logo. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) determined that the policy violated the Act because it prohibited employees from wearing union caps that bore union insignia (and thereby violated the employees’ rights under the Act). However, the policy also permitted employees to accessorize “in good taste and in accordance with all safety rules.” The company argued that the NLRB erred in failing to consider the employees’ ability, under the “accessorizing” portion of the policy, to apply union insignia to their company caps, and that, because employees were permitted to accessorize with union insignia, the policy did not violate the Act.
In World Color Corp. v. NLRB (D.C. Circuit No. 14-1028), the Court addressed a petition by a graphic printing company for review of a decision by the NLRB that the company’s employee hat policy violated the National Labor Relations Act (“the Act”). The employer’s policy prohibited the wearing of baseball caps other than company caps bearing the company logo. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) determined that the policy violated the Act because it prohibited employees from wearing union caps that bore union insignia (and thereby violated the employees’ rights under the Act). However, the policy also permitted employees to accessorize “in good taste and in accordance with all safety rules.” The company argued that the NLRB erred in failing to consider the employees’ ability, under the “accessorizing” portion of the policy, to apply union insignia to their company caps, and that, because employees were permitted to accessorize with union insignia, the policy did not violate the Act.
In Vance v. Ball State University, 133 S. Ct. 243 (2013), the Supreme Court narrowed the EEOC’s definition of a supervisor, which included individuals with broad day-to-day supervisory authority, to find that an employer can be held vicariously liable for the discriminatory acts of a supervisor, if the supervisor has the power to take tangible employment actions against the employee. In other words, the definition of supervisor was limited to those individual with the ability to hire, fire, transfer, or affect the status of the employee. The Maryland General Assembly has introduced House Bill 42, the “Fair Employment Preservation Act of 2015,” to codify existing state law and apply the broader definition of supervisor adopted by Maryland state and federal courts prior to the Vance ruling.
In Vance v. Ball State University, 133 S. Ct. 243 (2013), the Supreme Court narrowed the EEOC’s definition of a supervisor, which included individuals with broad day-to-day supervisory authority, to find that an employer can be held vicariously liable for the discriminatory acts of a supervisor, if the supervisor has the power to take tangible employment actions against the employee. In other words, the definition of supervisor was limited to those individual with the ability to hire, fire, transfer, or affect the status of the employee. The Maryland General Assembly has introduced House Bill 42, the “Fair Employment Preservation Act of 2015,” to codify existing state law and apply the broader definition of supervisor adopted by Maryland state and federal courts prior to the Vance ruling.
The advent of social media has changed the landscape of how people communicate, share and connect with others online, through applications such as Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Instagram, and Snapchat, among others. As social media has become the conduit by which people share thoughts, comments and videos online, employers have begun using the same tools to recruit potential hires, convey their brands, retain employees and increase visibility in the marketplace.
The advent of social media has changed the landscape of how people communicate, share and connect with others online, through applications such as Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Instagram, and Snapchat, among others. As social media has become the conduit by which people share thoughts, comments and videos online, employers have begun using the same tools to recruit potential hires, convey their brands, retain employees and increase visibility in the marketplace.
Please join us for educational and informative seminars dedicated exclusively to employment-related issues and concerns for our clients and friends of the firm
Topic: Dealing with difficult employees and how to end bad relationships
Please join us for educational and informative seminars dedicated exclusively to employment-related issues and concerns for our clients and friends of the firm
Topic: Dealing with difficult employees and how to end bad relationships
Montgomery County and the District of Columbia have enacted versions of what are commonly referred to as "Ban the Box" laws - laws that limit an employer's ability to inquire about a job applicant's criminal history.
Montgomery County and the District of Columbia have enacted versions of what are commonly referred to as "Ban the Box" laws - laws that limit an employer's ability to inquire about a job applicant's criminal history.
Please join us for educational and informative seminars dedicated exclusively to employment-related issues and concerns for our clients and friends of the firm.
Topic: Employee Handbooks - Policies that should be included in every handbook
Please join us for educational and informative seminars dedicated exclusively to employment-related issues and concerns for our clients and friends of the firm.
Topic: Employee Handbooks - Policies that should be included in every handbook
Please join us for educational and informative seminars dedicated exclusively to employment-related issues and concerns for our clients and friends of the firm.
Topic: Wage and Hour Issues: Classification of Employees
Please join us for educational and informative seminars dedicated exclusively to employment-related issues and concerns for our clients and friends of the firm.
Topic: Wage and Hour Issues: Classification of Employees
The purpose of this note is to summarize the significant differences between the criminal background check bill introduced in the Montgomery County Council in July (“Fair Criminal Record Screening Standards”) and the version of that bill that was passed into law by the Council on October 28, 2014. We also provide you with a comparison of the Montgomery County law to the District of Columbia’s corresponding criminal history law (“Fair Criminal Record Screening Amendment Act of 2014”).
The purpose of this note is to summarize the significant differences between the criminal background check bill introduced in the Montgomery County Council in July (“Fair Criminal Record Screening Standards”) and the version of that bill that was passed into law by the Council on October 28, 2014. We also provide you with a comparison of the Montgomery County law to the District of Columbia’s corresponding criminal history law (“Fair Criminal Record Screening Amendment Act of 2014”).
This event, hosted by the Four Rivers Heritage Area Education Committee, is one in a series of workshops for Heritage Professionals to help them meet their organizations' preservation and education goals with best management practices.
This event, hosted by the Four Rivers Heritage Area Education Committee, is one in a series of workshops for Heritage Professionals to help them meet their organizations' preservation and education goals with best management practices.
The District of Columbia has enacted a law that will prohibit employers with 10 or more full-time employees from inquiring about a job applicant’s criminal history during the initial application process. There is similar legislation pending in Montgomery County, Maryland, and a public hearing on the proposed law is scheduled for September 9.
The District of Columbia has enacted a law that will prohibit employers with 10 or more full-time employees from inquiring about a job applicant’s criminal history during the initial application process. There is similar legislation pending in Montgomery County, Maryland, and a public hearing on the proposed law is scheduled for September 9.
You are contemplating hiring an “intern” for your organization. You have budget constraints, but you could sure use the extra help. What should you do? Should the intern be classified as an unpaid volunteer or paid employee? Recently, the US Department of Labor (“DOL”) issued guidelines on how to structure an internship program in compliance with the Fair Labor Standards Act.
You are contemplating hiring an “intern” for your organization. You have budget constraints, but you could sure use the extra help. What should you do? Should the intern be classified as an unpaid volunteer or paid employee? Recently, the US Department of Labor (“DOL”) issued guidelines on how to structure an internship program in compliance with the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Recent memoranda issued by the General Counsel of the NLRB’s Operations Management Division make it clear that OSHA, Labor’s Wage and Hour Division, and the NLRB Regional Offices are going to be taking a more coordinated, less compartmentalized approach to addressing workplace complaints. The memoranda also encourage personnel from those agencies to advise claimants about possible claims under other labor laws.
Recent memoranda issued by the General Counsel of the NLRB’s Operations Management Division make it clear that OSHA, Labor’s Wage and Hour Division, and the NLRB Regional Offices are going to be taking a more coordinated, less compartmentalized approach to addressing workplace complaints. The memoranda also encourage personnel from those agencies to advise claimants about possible claims under other labor laws.
Employers in Baltimore will face new restrictions in conducting criminal background checks now that the city council has passed a tough new “ban the box” law.
Bill 13-0301, titled “Ban the Box – Fair Criminal Records Screening Practices,” passed the Baltimore City Council on April 28 and was expected to gain Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake’s signature. It is to go into effect 90 days after adoption.
Employers in Baltimore will face new restrictions in conducting criminal background checks now that the city council has passed a tough new “ban the box” law.
Bill 13-0301, titled “Ban the Box – Fair Criminal Records Screening Practices,” passed the Baltimore City Council on April 28 and was expected to gain Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake’s signature. It is to go into effect 90 days after adoption.
On January 28, a group of football players at Northwestern University filed a union election petition with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in Chicago. On Wednesday, March 26, 2014, the Board ruled that certain student athletes are employees entitled to a union election. This is the first time college athletes have sought to unionize under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), and this ruling could change college athletics forever.
On January 28, a group of football players at Northwestern University filed a union election petition with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in Chicago. On Wednesday, March 26, 2014, the Board ruled that certain student athletes are employees entitled to a union election. This is the first time college athletes have sought to unionize under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), and this ruling could change college athletics forever.
The U. S. District Court for the District of Columbia recently dealt with a question that has rarely been addressed in sexual harassment/ hostile work environment cases: under what circumstances is an employer liable for the sexual harassment of an employee by one of that employee’s subordinates?
The U. S. District Court for the District of Columbia recently dealt with a question that has rarely been addressed in sexual harassment/ hostile work environment cases: under what circumstances is an employer liable for the sexual harassment of an employee by one of that employee’s subordinates?
As part of ACI's 20th National Forum on Wage & Hour Claims and Class Actions, WTP's Kevin McCormick will join a panel including Wayne O. Adams, III, of Ice Miller LLP and Jonathan W. Yarbrough to address the following topics:
As part of ACI's 20th National Forum on Wage & Hour Claims and Class Actions, WTP's Kevin McCormick will join a panel including Wayne O. Adams, III, of Ice Miller LLP and Jonathan W. Yarbrough to address the following topics:
Learn how to protect your business from common mistakes that can turn into big financial penalties or expensive back pay. Examples of topics to be discussed include: understanding differences between state and federal labor laws; wage/hour issues; uniforms and prohibited wage deductions, and other issues that typically affect the restaurant industry.
Presenter - Ari Ghosal, from the law firm of Whiteford, Taylor & Preston for the Restaurant Association of Maryland members
Learn how to protect your business from common mistakes that can turn into big financial penalties or expensive back pay. Examples of topics to be discussed include: understanding differences between state and federal labor laws; wage/hour issues; uniforms and prohibited wage deductions, and other issues that typically affect the restaurant industry.
Presenter - Ari Ghosal, from the law firm of Whiteford, Taylor & Preston for the Restaurant Association of Maryland members
Maryland’s Reasonable Accommodations for Pregnant Workers Act goes into effect October 1, meaning Maryland employers with 15 or more employees must provide reasonable accommodations to employees who experience a disability because of a pregnancy.
Basically, the new law requires employers to treat pregnancies in much the same way disabilities covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) are handled. Accommodations are required unless they would impose an undue hardship on the employer.
Maryland’s Reasonable Accommodations for Pregnant Workers Act goes into effect October 1, meaning Maryland employers with 15 or more employees must provide reasonable accommodations to employees who experience a disability because of a pregnancy.
Basically, the new law requires employers to treat pregnancies in much the same way disabilities covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) are handled. Accommodations are required unless they would impose an undue hardship on the employer.
The impending need for compliance with the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 has been a source of great concern for employers. Recently, the U.S. government announced a one-year delay in the implementation of one of the statute’s central provisions, the employer mandate. Despite that extension, the law still requires that employers take action this year in order to remain compliant. This article examines one of the critical provisions of the law which remains in place notwithstanding the delay of the employer mandate.
The impending need for compliance with the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 has been a source of great concern for employers. Recently, the U.S. government announced a one-year delay in the implementation of one of the statute’s central provisions, the employer mandate. Despite that extension, the law still requires that employers take action this year in order to remain compliant. This article examines one of the critical provisions of the law which remains in place notwithstanding the delay of the employer mandate.
During the most recent legislative session, the Maryland General Assembly enacted legislation that creates an entirely new procedure by which employees who believe they are due unpaid wages can seek to obtain a lien against their employer for the wage amount. Most significantly, the procedure allows for the entry of a lien prior to a full adjudication in which the employee is obligated to demonstrate the merits of the wage claim. This article examines the new statute, which takes effect October 1, 2013.
During the most recent legislative session, the Maryland General Assembly enacted legislation that creates an entirely new procedure by which employees who believe they are due unpaid wages can seek to obtain a lien against their employer for the wage amount. Most significantly, the procedure allows for the entry of a lien prior to a full adjudication in which the employee is obligated to demonstrate the merits of the wage claim. This article examines the new statute, which takes effect October 1, 2013.
For the past several years, the political stalemate in Washington, D.C. has resulted in the National Labor Relations Board operating with fewer than its standard complement of five members. Earlier this month, an agreement between Senate Republicans and the Obama administration resulted in the confirmation of new NLRB members, breaking an impasse that has resulted in numerous legal challenges to decisions made while the NLRB was operating with members who had not been confirmed by the Senate. This article examines the backgrounds of the new Board members, and offers insights as to what the new membership composition will mean for employers in the coming years.
For the past several years, the political stalemate in Washington, D.C. has resulted in the National Labor Relations Board operating with fewer than its standard complement of five members. Earlier this month, an agreement between Senate Republicans and the Obama administration resulted in the confirmation of new NLRB members, breaking an impasse that has resulted in numerous legal challenges to decisions made while the NLRB was operating with members who had not been confirmed by the Senate. This article examines the backgrounds of the new Board members, and offers insights as to what the new membership composition will mean for employers in the coming years.
In a long-awaited decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has struck down the National Labor Relations Board’s mandate that all employers covered by the National Labor Relations Act post a notice of employee rights under the law. This article examines the controversy surrounding the Board’s unprecedented posting requirement and the impact of the D.C. Circuit’s decision.
In a long-awaited decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has struck down the National Labor Relations Board’s mandate that all employers covered by the National Labor Relations Act post a notice of employee rights under the law. This article examines the controversy surrounding the Board’s unprecedented posting requirement and the impact of the D.C. Circuit’s decision.
On March 8, 2013, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) published a revised Employment Eligibility Verification Form I-9, which contains some slight modifications to the familiar form used by employers when verifying the eligibility of newly hired employees to work in the United States. While employers were given a sixty-day grace period to begin using the revised form, as of May 7, 2013, the failure to use the revised form will subject an employer to statutory penalties. This article examines the revisions made to Form I-9.
On March 8, 2013, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) published a revised Employment Eligibility Verification Form I-9, which contains some slight modifications to the familiar form used by employers when verifying the eligibility of newly hired employees to work in the United States. While employers were given a sixty-day grace period to begin using the revised form, as of May 7, 2013, the failure to use the revised form will subject an employer to statutory penalties. This article examines the revisions made to Form I-9.
The Maryland legislative session typically includes the introduction of a number of bills affecting the relationship between employers and their employees. This article notes several such bills that were considered – but failed to pass – in the most recent session and examines a newly enacted law creating additional obligations for employers with pregnant employees.
The Maryland legislative session typically includes the introduction of a number of bills affecting the relationship between employers and their employees. This article notes several such bills that were considered – but failed to pass – in the most recent session and examines a newly enacted law creating additional obligations for employers with pregnant employees.
As part of the 3rd annual Employment Discrimination Litigation conference, this panel will focus on whistleblower claims, unprotected breaches of confidentiality, privilege issues, Fourth Amendment implications, and the impact of the SOX, Dodd-Frank and False Claims Act on such issues.
To register: 888.224.2480 or americanconference.com/discrimination
As part of the 3rd annual Employment Discrimination Litigation conference, this panel will focus on whistleblower claims, unprotected breaches of confidentiality, privilege issues, Fourth Amendment implications, and the impact of the SOX, Dodd-Frank and False Claims Act on such issues.
To register: 888.224.2480 or americanconference.com/discrimination
In previous posts, we’ve discussed how the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) most frequent complaint about how employers handle employees’ use of social media is that it interferes with protected concerted activity -- Section 7 rights under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).
In previous posts, we’ve discussed how the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) most frequent complaint about how employers handle employees’ use of social media is that it interferes with protected concerted activity -- Section 7 rights under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is continuing efforts to broaden its impact on the workforce with the launch of a webpage aimed at communicating to workers how they can use the law in disputes with their employers.
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) is continuing efforts to broaden its impact on the workforce with the launch of a webpage aimed at communicating to workers how they can use the law in disputes with their employers.
In the latest development of the ongoing drama surrounding the National Labor Relations Board’s mandate that all employers covered by the National Labor Relations Act must post a notice of employee rights under the law, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has issued an order staying implementation of the posting requirement, which had been set to take effect on April 30, 2012. This article examines the controversy surrounding the posting requirement and the impact of the D.C. Circuit’s decision.
In the latest development of the ongoing drama surrounding the National Labor Relations Board’s mandate that all employers covered by the National Labor Relations Act must post a notice of employee rights under the law, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has issued an order staying implementation of the posting requirement, which had been set to take effect on April 30, 2012. This article examines the controversy surrounding the posting requirement and the impact of the D.C. Circuit’s decision.
In a recent decision, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit held that an employee’s internal complaint to company management about possible wage-hour violations may be protected under the Fair Labor Standards Act’s anti-retaliation provisions. The Fourth Circuit reversed the decision of the trial court, which had dismissed the case based on its finding that the informal complaints were not protected under the FLSA. This article examines the facts of this important case, as well as the significant implications for employers.
In a recent decision, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit held that an employee’s internal complaint to company management about possible wage-hour violations may be protected under the Fair Labor Standards Act’s anti-retaliation provisions. The Fourth Circuit reversed the decision of the trial court, which had dismissed the case based on its finding that the informal complaints were not protected under the FLSA. This article examines the facts of this important case, as well as the significant implications for employers.
During the recently completed legislative session, the Maryland General Assembly became the first state legislature in the country to pass legislation prohibiting employers from requesting access to employees’ and job applicants’ personal computer accounts, most notably Facebook and other social media accounts. This article examines the effects the law will have on how Maryland employers handle hiring decisions and internal investigations.
During the recently completed legislative session, the Maryland General Assembly became the first state legislature in the country to pass legislation prohibiting employers from requesting access to employees’ and job applicants’ personal computer accounts, most notably Facebook and other social media accounts. This article examines the effects the law will have on how Maryland employers handle hiring decisions and internal investigations.
A one-day master class packed with updates, interaction and answers to your wage & hour concerns. Topics include: why the FLSA is the most dangerous statute for employers; Managing compensation for activities like travel time and volunteer activities; Managing overtime; How bonuses, commissions, paid leave and the like figure into overtime calculations; "Fair Pay"; Retaliations claims; State wage law and regulations.
Recertification credit hours: 6.25 hours through the HR Certification Institute
A one-day master class packed with updates, interaction and answers to your wage & hour concerns. Topics include: why the FLSA is the most dangerous statute for employers; Managing compensation for activities like travel time and volunteer activities; Managing overtime; How bonuses, commissions, paid leave and the like figure into overtime calculations; "Fair Pay"; Retaliations claims; State wage law and regulations.
Recertification credit hours: 6.25 hours through the HR Certification Institute
Master FMLA Administration with this program created just for Maryland employers and HR management. Topics include: Recent FMLA developments; Serious health conditions - collecting medical information; Military family leave; Notification deadlines, curbing abuse and preventing claims; Coordinating FMLA and ADA, workers' comp, and state family leave laws.
Master FMLA Administration with this program created just for Maryland employers and HR management. Topics include: Recent FMLA developments; Serious health conditions - collecting medical information; Military family leave; Notification deadlines, curbing abuse and preventing claims; Coordinating FMLA and ADA, workers' comp, and state family leave laws.
Worker classification has become a major concern for employers, as governmental agencies have stepped up their efforts to investigate allegations that individuals who are properly considered employees have been misclassified as independent contractors. Recently, the IRS announced a program under which employers may be eligible to reclassify workers as employees at a reduced cost and without the threat of major IRS penalties. This article examines the potential benefits – and pitfalls – associated with the new program and provides an overview of the worker misclassification conundrum.
Worker classification has become a major concern for employers, as governmental agencies have stepped up their efforts to investigate allegations that individuals who are properly considered employees have been misclassified as independent contractors. Recently, the IRS announced a program under which employers may be eligible to reclassify workers as employees at a reduced cost and without the threat of major IRS penalties. This article examines the potential benefits – and pitfalls – associated with the new program and provides an overview of the worker misclassification conundrum.
One particularly vexing issue that employers are often faced with is the confluence of FMLA and ADA concerns that arise when an employee experiencing a serious health condition – which may also qualify as a disability for purposes of the ADA – is approaching the end of his or her FMLA leave allotment. While the employer’s obligations under the FMLA can be determined by reference to concrete obligations imposed by that statute, the obligations imposed by the ADA frequently require a case-by-case determination of whether the accommodation needed by an employee is reasonable under the circumstances. The interplay between these statutes frequently causes significant headaches for employers. This issue was recently taken up by the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. This article examines the case, which has significant lessons for employers attempting to maintain compliance with these statutes.
One particularly vexing issue that employers are often faced with is the confluence of FMLA and ADA concerns that arise when an employee experiencing a serious health condition – which may also qualify as a disability for purposes of the ADA – is approaching the end of his or her FMLA leave allotment. While the employer’s obligations under the FMLA can be determined by reference to concrete obligations imposed by that statute, the obligations imposed by the ADA frequently require a case-by-case determination of whether the accommodation needed by an employee is reasonable under the circumstances. The interplay between these statutes frequently causes significant headaches for employers. This issue was recently taken up by the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. This article examines the case, which has significant lessons for employers attempting to maintain compliance with these statutes.
On December 21, the NLRB adopted a final rule implementing certain changes to the procedures governing union elections. While the NLRB has chosen to forego implementation of some of the more controversial proposed rules that had previously been announced, the changes included in the final rule will nevertheless have significant consequences for employers who may be targeted for organizing. This article examines the Board’s final rule and its potential impact for employers.
On December 21, the NLRB adopted a final rule implementing certain changes to the procedures governing union elections. While the NLRB has chosen to forego implementation of some of the more controversial proposed rules that had previously been announced, the changes included in the final rule will nevertheless have significant consequences for employers who may be targeted for organizing. This article examines the Board’s final rule and its potential impact for employers.
Last August, the National Labor Relations Board issued a regulation requiring that all employers subject to the National Labor Relations Act post a notice advising employees of their right to form unions and engage in other activities protected by the Act. The effective date of the posting requirement was originally set for November 2011, but was later pushed back to January 31, 2012. The NLRB has now further delayed the implementation date to April 30.
Last August, the National Labor Relations Board issued a regulation requiring that all employers subject to the National Labor Relations Act post a notice advising employees of their right to form unions and engage in other activities protected by the Act. The effective date of the posting requirement was originally set for November 2011, but was later pushed back to January 31, 2012. The NLRB has now further delayed the implementation date to April 30.
Special from BLR's Advanced Employment Issues Symposium: In a previous article, attorney Kevin McCormick briefed us on new union tactics and the new NLRB aggressiveness; today, his 7 steps to get ready for union organizers plus an introduction to a unique guide just for small, or even one-person, HR departments.
Special from BLR's Advanced Employment Issues Symposium: In a previous article, attorney Kevin McCormick briefed us on new union tactics and the new NLRB aggressiveness; today, his 7 steps to get ready for union organizers plus an introduction to a unique guide just for small, or even one-person, HR departments.
Special from BLR's Advanced Employment Issues Symposium: Unions are desperate, says attorney Kevin McCormick, because their numbers are down and many of the things they once promised workers (like safer workplaces) are now mandated by government agencies. The result? They're getting aggressive in new ways.
Special from BLR's Advanced Employment Issues Symposium: Unions are desperate, says attorney Kevin McCormick, because their numbers are down and many of the things they once promised workers (like safer workplaces) are now mandated by government agencies. The result? They're getting aggressive in new ways.
In the Fall 2011 issue of the Labor & Employment Newsletter, we reported on a rule adopted by the National Labor Relations Board that will require employers to post a written notice of employee rights under the National Labor Relations Act. The rule was scheduled to take effect November 14, 2011. This Alert is to inform you that the NLRB has now postponed the implementation date of the posting requirement to January 31, 2012.
In the Fall 2011 issue of the Labor & Employment Newsletter, we reported on a rule adopted by the National Labor Relations Board that will require employers to post a written notice of employee rights under the National Labor Relations Act. The rule was scheduled to take effect November 14, 2011. This Alert is to inform you that the NLRB has now postponed the implementation date of the posting requirement to January 31, 2012.
Maryland courts have long recognized a common law right of action for employees who allege that they were terminated in violation of a public policy. While the parameters of this cause of action defy easy explanation, the Court of Appeals’ recent decision in Parks v. Alpharma, Inc., sheds some light on just what constitutes the sort of public policy that will support a wrongful discharge claim. This article takes a closer look at the wrongful discharge tort and the Court of Appeals’ most recent attempt to clarify its reach.
Maryland courts have long recognized a common law right of action for employees who allege that they were terminated in violation of a public policy. While the parameters of this cause of action defy easy explanation, the Court of Appeals’ recent decision in Parks v. Alpharma, Inc., sheds some light on just what constitutes the sort of public policy that will support a wrongful discharge claim. This article takes a closer look at the wrongful discharge tort and the Court of Appeals’ most recent attempt to clarify its reach.
During its 2011 legislative session, the Maryland Legislature passed the Job Applicant Fairness Act, which was signed into law by Governor O’Malley on April 12. The law imposes significant restrictions on the ability of employers to perform credit checks on job applicants and employees. This article examines the details of the new law, and the likely effects for employers.
During its 2011 legislative session, the Maryland Legislature passed the Job Applicant Fairness Act, which was signed into law by Governor O’Malley on April 12. The law imposes significant restrictions on the ability of employers to perform credit checks on job applicants and employees. This article examines the details of the new law, and the likely effects for employers.
On August 30, 2011, the National Labor Relations Board issued a final rule that will require covered employers to post and disseminate a notice to employees summarizing the rights protected by the National Labor Relations Act. This article addresses the immediate issues raised by the new requirement, as well as the broader concerns it raises for employers going forward.
On August 30, 2011, the National Labor Relations Board issued a final rule that will require covered employers to post and disseminate a notice to employees summarizing the rights protected by the National Labor Relations Act. This article addresses the immediate issues raised by the new requirement, as well as the broader concerns it raises for employers going forward.
In November 2008, the District of Columbia enacted the Accrued Sick and Safe Leave Act of 2008 ("ASSLA" or the "Act"). In doing so, the District became the second of only two jurisdictions in the country to mandate paid sick and "safety" leave. Unfortunately, the new law resulted in more questions than answers. The District recently issued final regulations in an attempt to clarify the ASSLA.
In November 2008, the District of Columbia enacted the Accrued Sick and Safe Leave Act of 2008 ("ASSLA" or the "Act"). In doing so, the District became the second of only two jurisdictions in the country to mandate paid sick and "safety" leave. Unfortunately, the new law resulted in more questions than answers. The District recently issued final regulations in an attempt to clarify the ASSLA.
This is the second of two articles on the potential legal issues that can arise from the use and misuse of social media in the workplace. Part 1 covered the use of social media in the pre-employment setting. Part 2 covers the use of social media in employment and post-employment situations.
This is the second of two articles on the potential legal issues that can arise from the use and misuse of social media in the workplace. Part 1 covered the use of social media in the pre-employment setting. Part 2 covers the use of social media in employment and post-employment situations.
On June 17th, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the National Labor Relations Board was not authorized to issue decisions in pending cases during a twenty-seven month period in which three of its five seats were vacant. The ruling was a victory for the employer in the case, New Process Steel, which had challenged an adverse ruling by the Board. But more significantly, the ruling of the Supreme Court puts into question almost 600 decisions issued by the two-member Board during a period of more than two years.
On June 17th, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the National Labor Relations Board was not authorized to issue decisions in pending cases during a twenty-seven month period in which three of its five seats were vacant. The ruling was a victory for the employer in the case, New Process Steel, which had challenged an adverse ruling by the Board. But more significantly, the ruling of the Supreme Court puts into question almost 600 decisions issued by the two-member Board during a period of more than two years.
Although it may not come as a surprise to many HR professionals, in Maryland, an employee may, under certain circumstances, receive unemployment benefits while still employed.
Although it may not come as a surprise to many HR professionals, in Maryland, an employee may, under certain circumstances, receive unemployment benefits while still employed.
As many seasoned HR professionals may know, oftentimes when a deposition is taken of a party or witness in litigation, the lawyer may request that the deponent or witness will "read and sign" the deposition.
Technically, this means that the witness is required to review the deposition transcript and make certain corrections on an "errata" sheet within 30 days from receipt of the transcript. Failure to do so will prevent the witness from later attempting to clarify and/or change his or her deposition testimony.
As many seasoned HR professionals may know, oftentimes when a deposition is taken of a party or witness in litigation, the lawyer may request that the deponent or witness will "read and sign" the deposition.
Technically, this means that the witness is required to review the deposition transcript and make certain corrections on an "errata" sheet within 30 days from receipt of the transcript. Failure to do so will prevent the witness from later attempting to clarify and/or change his or her deposition testimony.
On February 17, 2009, President Obama signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, referred to in the press as the "Economic Stimulus Act." One provision in this Act that has received relatively little publicity is a subsidy for former employees and their dependents who elected, or were offered the opportunity to elect, to continue health insurance coverage following termination of employment.
On February 17, 2009, President Obama signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, referred to in the press as the "Economic Stimulus Act." One provision in this Act that has received relatively little publicity is a subsidy for former employees and their dependents who elected, or were offered the opportunity to elect, to continue health insurance coverage following termination of employment.
On March 10, 2009, Senator Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) and Representative George Miller (D-California) reintroduced the “Employee Free Choice Act of 2007” (EFCA) (S. 1041, H.R. 800), legislation, which, if passed, would dramatically change the way unions can organize workers. The EFCA was initially introduced in 2007, but was derailed by the Senate.
On March 10, 2009, Senator Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) and Representative George Miller (D-California) reintroduced the “Employee Free Choice Act of 2007” (EFCA) (S. 1041, H.R. 800), legislation, which, if passed, would dramatically change the way unions can organize workers. The EFCA was initially introduced in 2007, but was derailed by the Senate.
In today's unsettled economic climate, many employers are considering various ways to reduce payroll expenses. One common approach is to simply cut the salaries for your exempt employees.
Although such a practice can work, if it is not done correctly you may wind up losing the exempt status for your salaried employees, resulting in a significant unpaid overtime liability for all of those workers who may have been subject to the salary reduction.
In today's unsettled economic climate, many employers are considering various ways to reduce payroll expenses. One common approach is to simply cut the salaries for your exempt employees.
Although such a practice can work, if it is not done correctly you may wind up losing the exempt status for your salaried employees, resulting in a significant unpaid overtime liability for all of those workers who may have been subject to the salary reduction.
The attached alert has been prepared for general informational purposes only and is not intended as specific legal advice and no legal or business decision should be based solely on its content.
The attached alert has been prepared for general informational purposes only and is not intended as specific legal advice and no legal or business decision should be based solely on its content.
Last Fall, the Maryland Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation (DLLR) changed its long-standing policy with regard to the payout of accrued but unused leave when an employee is terminated.
Last Fall, the Maryland Department of Labor, Licensing and Regulation (DLLR) changed its long-standing policy with regard to the payout of accrued but unused leave when an employee is terminated.
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) recently held that an employer violated federal labor law by telling union supporters to look for jobs elsewhere if they were dissatisfied with their current jobs. The NLRB agreed with the administrative law judge (ALJ) that the statement constituted an unlawful threat to discharge workers based on their protected, concerted activities.
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) recently held that an employer violated federal labor law by telling union supporters to look for jobs elsewhere if they were dissatisfied with their current jobs. The NLRB agreed with the administrative law judge (ALJ) that the statement constituted an unlawful threat to discharge workers based on their protected, concerted activities.
A telephone company customer service representative who was diagnosed as HIV positive while on medical leave for work-related stress is not disabled under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled Blanks v. Southwestern Bell Communications Inc., 13 AD Cases 1253, 5th Cir., 11/4/02).
A telephone company customer service representative who was diagnosed as HIV positive while on medical leave for work-related stress is not disabled under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled Blanks v. Southwestern Bell Communications Inc., 13 AD Cases 1253, 5th Cir., 11/4/02).
An African American employee at a printing company in Missouri offered sufficient evidence to submit to a jury the issue of whether his employer knew or should have known about the alleged racially hostile work environment – including a physical threat of death directed specifically at the employee – but failed to take prompt and effective remedial action, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit recently ruled (Reedy v. Quebecor Printing Eagle, Inc., 8th Cir., 6/30/03).
An African American employee at a printing company in Missouri offered sufficient evidence to submit to a jury the issue of whether his employer knew or should have known about the alleged racially hostile work environment – including a physical threat of death directed specifically at the employee – but failed to take prompt and effective remedial action, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit recently ruled (Reedy v. Quebecor Printing Eagle, Inc., 8th Cir., 6/30/03).
For decades, employers have struggled with classifying their employees as “exempt” or “unexempt” from federal overtime compensation requirements under the FLSA, which became law in 1938. The current federal regulations governing the overtime exemption for “white —collar” employees are badly out of date and confusing. The costly effect of mis-classification has been substantial back pay liability and, more recently, class-action lawsuits. On March 31, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) published a proposal to modernize its regulations defining overtime exemptions for “white collar” employees in the administrative, executive, and professional employee classifications. The DOL estimates that the regulations will cover 110 million employees in 6.5 million establishments. The 90-day public comment period expired on June 30, 2003, and the DOL hopes to have the final regulations in effect by December 2003.
For decades, employers have struggled with classifying their employees as “exempt” or “unexempt” from federal overtime compensation requirements under the FLSA, which became law in 1938. The current federal regulations governing the overtime exemption for “white —collar” employees are badly out of date and confusing. The costly effect of mis-classification has been substantial back pay liability and, more recently, class-action lawsuits. On March 31, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) published a proposal to modernize its regulations defining overtime exemptions for “white collar” employees in the administrative, executive, and professional employee classifications. The DOL estimates that the regulations will cover 110 million employees in 6.5 million establishments. The 90-day public comment period expired on June 30, 2003, and the DOL hopes to have the final regulations in effect by December 2003.
In a decision issued on January 15, 2002, the United States Supreme Court decided the hotly contested issue of whether an agreement between an employer and an employee to arbitrate employment-related disputes, bars the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) from pursuing victim-specific judicial relief, such as back pay, reinstatement, and damages, in an enforcement action alleging that the employer violated the Americans With Disabilities Act (“ADA”).
In a decision issued on January 15, 2002, the United States Supreme Court decided the hotly contested issue of whether an agreement between an employer and an employee to arbitrate employment-related disputes, bars the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) from pursuing victim-specific judicial relief, such as back pay, reinstatement, and damages, in an enforcement action alleging that the employer violated the Americans With Disabilities Act (“ADA”).
A Georgia dental practice did not violate federal disability law by discharging a hygienist after finding out that he was HIV-positive, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held, affirming a lower court’s summary judgment to the employer, Waddell v. Valley Forge Dental Assocs. Inc., (11th Cir., December, 2001).
A Georgia dental practice did not violate federal disability law by discharging a hygienist after finding out that he was HIV-positive, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held, affirming a lower court’s summary judgment to the employer, Waddell v. Valley Forge Dental Assocs. Inc., (11th Cir., December, 2001).
In holding that an employer need not accommodate an employee, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit found that a doctor’s note that stated the operation of heavy equipment “may pose problems” meant that the employee could not perform essential functions of a position. Mathews v. Denver Post, (10th Cir. 263 F.3d 1164 2001). Therefore the employer properly terminated an epileptic employee where the employee’s doctor stated that performing some of the essential functions of the job “may pose problems.”
In holding that an employer need not accommodate an employee, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit found that a doctor’s note that stated the operation of heavy equipment “may pose problems” meant that the employee could not perform essential functions of a position. Mathews v. Denver Post, (10th Cir. 263 F.3d 1164 2001). Therefore the employer properly terminated an epileptic employee where the employee’s doctor stated that performing some of the essential functions of the job “may pose problems.”
In the recent case of Porterfield v. Mascari II, Inc., (Md. Ct. of Special Appeals, January, 2002) a female employee who consulted a lawyer after receiving a written warning for poor performance, and, as a result, was fired, cannot maintain a cause of action for wrongful discharge.
In the recent case of Porterfield v. Mascari II, Inc., (Md. Ct. of Special Appeals, January, 2002) a female employee who consulted a lawyer after receiving a written warning for poor performance, and, as a result, was fired, cannot maintain a cause of action for wrongful discharge.
In McCabe v. Medex (Maryland Court of Special Appeals, Sept. 2001) , Timothy McCabe began working for Medex as a sales representative in November 1998. McCabe received an annual salary of $49,000, plus commissions. At Medex, the fiscal year ran from February 1, 1999 through January 31, 2000. Pursuant to Medex’s Employee Handbook, all commissions were “conditional upon meeting targets and the participant being an employee at the time of actual payment . . . .”
In McCabe v. Medex (Maryland Court of Special Appeals, Sept. 2001) , Timothy McCabe began working for Medex as a sales representative in November 1998. McCabe received an annual salary of $49,000, plus commissions. At Medex, the fiscal year ran from February 1, 1999 through January 31, 2000. Pursuant to Medex’s Employee Handbook, all commissions were “conditional upon meeting targets and the participant being an employee at the time of actual payment . . . .”
Recently, in Toyota Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc. v. Ella Williams, the Supreme Court made clear that the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA” or “Act”) imposes strict standards for finding “disability” status under the Act. While the case specifically addressed limitations on manual tasks caused by carpal tunnel syndrome and other conditions, the Court made clear that the Act generally should be strictly construed to create a “demanding standard” for an individual to qualify as “disabled” under the Act.
Recently, in Toyota Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc. v. Ella Williams, the Supreme Court made clear that the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA” or “Act”) imposes strict standards for finding “disability” status under the Act. While the case specifically addressed limitations on manual tasks caused by carpal tunnel syndrome and other conditions, the Court made clear that the Act generally should be strictly construed to create a “demanding standard” for an individual to qualify as “disabled” under the Act.
In the case of Baltimore Harbor Charters, Inc. v. Frank Ayd III (Sept., 2001), the Maryland Court of Appeals ruled that the founder and former president of Baltimore Harbor Charters, Inc., can keep the $66,000 he won in his breach of contract suit against the company. and can also try to treble that amount in a new trial under the Maryland Wage Payment and Collection Act.
In the case of Baltimore Harbor Charters, Inc. v. Frank Ayd III (Sept., 2001), the Maryland Court of Appeals ruled that the founder and former president of Baltimore Harbor Charters, Inc., can keep the $66,000 he won in his breach of contract suit against the company. and can also try to treble that amount in a new trial under the Maryland Wage Payment and Collection Act.
The recently ended session of the Maryland legislature has passed legislation prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in employment, housing, and public accommodations.
The new legislation amends Article 49B, the State’s current anti-discrimination law which protects from discrimination any person claiming to be aggrieved by an alleged discriminatory act based on race, sex, color, national origin, age, religion, marital status, or disability. Sexual orientation is defined as male or female homosexuality, heterosexuality, or bisexuality.
The recently ended session of the Maryland legislature has passed legislation prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in employment, housing, and public accommodations.
The new legislation amends Article 49B, the State’s current anti-discrimination law which protects from discrimination any person claiming to be aggrieved by an alleged discriminatory act based on race, sex, color, national origin, age, religion, marital status, or disability. Sexual orientation is defined as male or female homosexuality, heterosexuality, or bisexuality.
President Bush’s announcement that as many as 50,000 members of the National Guard and Reserves may be called up in the wake of terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon is prompting the Labor Department to ramp up efforts to inform employees and employers that jobs and benefits are protected in such situations.
President Bush’s announcement that as many as 50,000 members of the National Guard and Reserves may be called up in the wake of terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon is prompting the Labor Department to ramp up efforts to inform employees and employers that jobs and benefits are protected in such situations.
Recently, the Maryland legislature passed a bill authorizing Maryland employers to conduct on-site drug testing of job applicants. The law became effective on October 1, 2001. It does not apply to testing of current employees. Under existing Maryland law, passed in 1989, employer substance abuse testing is limited to state certified labs. The law contains a series of procedural safeguards such as retesting of an original positive result, notification to the employee being tested of his/her rights, chain of custody safeguards, etc.
Recently, the Maryland legislature passed a bill authorizing Maryland employers to conduct on-site drug testing of job applicants. The law became effective on October 1, 2001. It does not apply to testing of current employees. Under existing Maryland law, passed in 1989, employer substance abuse testing is limited to state certified labs. The law contains a series of procedural safeguards such as retesting of an original positive result, notification to the employee being tested of his/her rights, chain of custody safeguards, etc.
Setting a precedent for how companies can structure workplace labor-management committees without running afoul of labor laws, the National Labor Relations Board ruled that Crown Cork & Seal Company got it right. Crown Cork & Seal Co., 334 NLRB No. 92, 7/20/01.
Setting a precedent for how companies can structure workplace labor-management committees without running afoul of labor laws, the National Labor Relations Board ruled that Crown Cork & Seal Company got it right. Crown Cork & Seal Co., 334 NLRB No. 92, 7/20/01.
Kentucky River Community Care, Inc. (KRCC), an operator of a mental health care facility, refused to comply with an order to bargain with a labor union, arguing that the bargaining unit was not properly certified because it was made up of nurses who were “supervisors.” KRCC contended that the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) was incorrect in not exempting the nurses from the appropriate bargaining unit. It also argued that KRCC should not have been allocated the burden of proving the supervisory status of the nurses.
Kentucky River Community Care, Inc. (KRCC), an operator of a mental health care facility, refused to comply with an order to bargain with a labor union, arguing that the bargaining unit was not properly certified because it was made up of nurses who were “supervisors.” KRCC contended that the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) was incorrect in not exempting the nurses from the appropriate bargaining unit. It also argued that KRCC should not have been allocated the burden of proving the supervisory status of the nurses.
Whiteford has added veteran litigator and trial lawyer John M. Erbach as a Partner in its Richmond office, strengthening the firm’s intellectual property and commercial litigation capabilities in Virginia.
87 lawyers from Whiteford have been selected by their peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® 2027. The attorneys selected are based in the firm’s Delaware, Florida, Kentucky, Maryland, New York, Virginia and Washington, DC offices. Client comments are posted on the Best Lawyers website, at bestlawfirms.com.
Whiteford is pleased to announce that Chambers and Partners has once again ranked the firm highly in its 2026 list of leading firms and business lawyers. This year’s recognition includes 31 attorneys in 16 practice areas at the National and State level.
Whiteford is pleased to announce that Chambers and Partners has once again ranked the firm highly in its 2026 list of leading firms and business lawyers. This year’s recognition includes 31 attorneys in 16 practice areas at the National and State level.
Betsy Davis is widely recognized as one of the leading employment lawyers in Virginia. Based in Richmond, she has earned recognition from Chambers USA, Benchmark Litigation, Best Lawyers in America, Virginia Lawyers Weekly and Virginia Business. She serves Whiteford on its Executive Committee, as its Co-General Counsel and as Co-Chair of the Labor and Employment Group.
Betsy Davis is widely recognized as one of the leading employment lawyers in Virginia. Based in Richmond, she has earned recognition from Chambers USA, Benchmark Litigation, Best Lawyers in America, Virginia Lawyers Weekly and Virginia Business. She serves Whiteford on its Executive Committee, as its Co-General Counsel and as Co-Chair of the Labor and Employment Group.
Whiteford is pleased to announce that “Best Law Firms” has awarded the firm exemplary rankings for 2026. Twenty-three of the firm’s practices are ranked at the national level, with the firm’s Bankruptcy, Construction Litigation and Real Estate Litigation practices receiving national Tier 1 rankings.
Whiteford is pleased to announce that “Best Law Firms” has awarded the firm exemplary rankings for 2026. Twenty-three of the firm’s practices are ranked at the national level, with the firm’s Bankruptcy, Construction Litigation and Real Estate Litigation practices receiving national Tier 1 rankings.
Whiteford is pleased to announce that “Best Law Firms” has awarded the firm exemplary rankings for 2026. Twenty of the firm’s practices are ranked in Virginia.
Whiteford is pleased to announce that “Best Law Firms” has awarded the firm exemplary rankings for 2026. Twenty of the firm’s practices are ranked in Virginia.
Benchmark Litigation, the widely respected guide to leading litigation firms and lawyers, has announced that eleven Whiteford attorneys have been named 2026 “Litigation Stars” in Delaware, Maryland, Virginia and Nationally.
Benchmark Litigation, the widely respected guide to leading litigation firms and lawyers, has announced that eleven Whiteford attorneys have been named 2026 “Litigation Stars” in Delaware, Maryland, Virginia and Nationally.
83 lawyers from Whiteford have been selected by their peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® 2026. The lawyers selected are based in the firm’s Delaware, Florida, Kentucky, Maryland, New York, Virginia and Washington, DC offices. Client comments are posted on the Best Lawyers website, at bestlawfirms.com.
83 lawyers from Whiteford have been selected by their peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® 2026. The lawyers selected are based in the firm’s Delaware, Florida, Kentucky, Maryland, New York, Virginia and Washington, DC offices. Client comments are posted on the Best Lawyers website, at bestlawfirms.com.
Whiteford is pleased to announce that Chambers and Partners has once again ranked the firm highly in its 2025 list of leading firms and business lawyers. This year’s recognition includes 31 attorneys in a record 15 practice areas at the National and State level.
Whiteford is pleased to announce that Chambers and Partners has once again ranked the firm highly in its 2025 list of leading firms and business lawyers. This year’s recognition includes 31 attorneys in a record 15 practice areas at the National and State level.
The Daily Record has named Peter Guattery to its 2025 Maryland Employment Law Power List. Attorneys named to Daily Record Power Lists are selected by the editorial leadership team with input from readers and the broader legal community.
The Daily Record has named Peter Guattery to its 2025 Maryland Employment Law Power List. Attorneys named to Daily Record Power Lists are selected by the editorial leadership team with input from readers and the broader legal community.
Whiteford is pleased to announce that “Best Law Firms” has awarded the firm exemplary rankings for 2025. Nineteen of the firm’s practices are ranked in Virginia.
Whiteford is pleased to announce that “Best Law Firms” has awarded the firm exemplary rankings for 2025. Nineteen of the firm’s practices are ranked in Virginia.
Whiteford is pleased to announce that “Best Law Firms” has awarded the firm exemplary rankings for 2025. Twenty-two of the firm’s practices are ranked at the national level, and the firm’s Bankruptcy, Construction and Labor & Employment litigation practices have been recognized with national Tier 1 rankings.
Whiteford is pleased to announce that “Best Law Firms” has awarded the firm exemplary rankings for 2025. Twenty-two of the firm’s practices are ranked at the national level, and the firm’s Bankruptcy, Construction and Labor & Employment litigation practices have been recognized with national Tier 1 rankings.
Whiteford is pleased to announce that Chambers and Partners has once again ranked the firm highly in its 2024 list of leading firms and business lawyers.
Whiteford is pleased to announce that Chambers and Partners has once again ranked the firm highly in its 2024 list of leading firms and business lawyers.
87 lawyers from Whiteford, Taylor & Preston have been selected by their peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® 2024 (copyright 2023 by Woodward/White, Inc., of Aiken S.C.). New practice areas of recognition include CleanTech Law and Entertainment and Sports Law. The lawyers selected are based in the firm’s Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Washington offices. Client comments are posted on the Best Lawyers website, at bestlawfirms.com.
87 lawyers from Whiteford, Taylor & Preston have been selected by their peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® 2024 (copyright 2023 by Woodward/White, Inc., of Aiken S.C.). New practice areas of recognition include CleanTech Law and Entertainment and Sports Law. The lawyers selected are based in the firm’s Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Washington offices. Client comments are posted on the Best Lawyers website, at bestlawfirms.com.
Whiteford is pleased to announce that Chambers and Partners has once again ranked the firm highly in its 2023 list of leading firms and business lawyers.
Whiteford is pleased to announce that Chambers and Partners has once again ranked the firm highly in its 2023 list of leading firms and business lawyers.
Whiteford, Taylor and Preston is pleased to announce that U.S. News and World Report - Best Lawyers ® “Best Law Firms” has awarded the firm exemplary rankings for 2023.
Whiteford, Taylor and Preston is pleased to announce that U.S. News and World Report - Best Lawyers ® “Best Law Firms” has awarded the firm exemplary rankings for 2023.
73 lawyers from Whiteford, Taylor & Preston have been selected by their peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® 2023 (copyright 2022 by Woodward/White, Inc., of Aiken S.C.). The lawyers selected are based in the firm’s Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Washington, D.C. offices. Client comments are posted on the U.S. News & Best Lawyers web site, at bestlawfirms.com.
73 lawyers from Whiteford, Taylor & Preston have been selected by their peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® 2023 (copyright 2022 by Woodward/White, Inc., of Aiken S.C.). The lawyers selected are based in the firm’s Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Washington, D.C. offices. Client comments are posted on the U.S. News & Best Lawyers web site, at bestlawfirms.com.
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston is pleased to announce that Chambers and Partners has once again ranked the firm highly in its 2022 list of leading firms and business lawyers. This year’s recognition includes 29 attorneys in 14 practice areas at the National and State level.
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston is pleased to announce that Chambers and Partners has once again ranked the firm highly in its 2022 list of leading firms and business lawyers. This year’s recognition includes 29 attorneys in 14 practice areas at the National and State level.
Whiteford, Taylor and Preston is pleased to announce that U.S. News and World Report - Best Lawyers ® “Best Law Firms” has awarded the firm exemplary rankings for 2022. Twenty-one of the firm’s practices are ranked at the national level, and the firm’s bankruptcy and Construction Litigation practices have been recognized with national Tier 1 rankings. At the state level, new recognitions include Admiralty & Maritime Law, Nonprofit/Charities Law, Patent Law and Privacy and Data Security Law.
Whiteford, Taylor and Preston is pleased to announce that U.S. News and World Report - Best Lawyers ® “Best Law Firms” has awarded the firm exemplary rankings for 2022. Twenty-one of the firm’s practices are ranked at the national level, and the firm’s bankruptcy and Construction Litigation practices have been recognized with national Tier 1 rankings. At the state level, new recognitions include Admiralty & Maritime Law, Nonprofit/Charities Law, Patent Law and Privacy and Data Security Law.
A record 75 lawyers from Whiteford, Taylor & Preston have been selected by their peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® 2022 (copyright 2021 by Woodward/White, Inc., of Aiken S.C.). The lawyers selected are based in the firm’s Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Washington offices. Client comments are posted on the U.S. News & Best Lawyers web site, at bestlawfirms.com.
A record 75 lawyers from Whiteford, Taylor & Preston have been selected by their peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® 2022 (copyright 2021 by Woodward/White, Inc., of Aiken S.C.). The lawyers selected are based in the firm’s Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Washington offices. Client comments are posted on the U.S. News & Best Lawyers web site, at bestlawfirms.com.
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston is pleased to announce that Chambers and Partners has once again ranked the firm highly in its 2021 list of leading firms and business lawyers. This year’s recognition includes 25 attorneys in 11 practice areas in 3 states and the District of Columbia.
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston is pleased to announce that Chambers and Partners has once again ranked the firm highly in its 2021 list of leading firms and business lawyers. This year’s recognition includes 25 attorneys in 11 practice areas in 3 states and the District of Columbia.
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston is pleased to have represented the owners of Ivy Ventures, LLC, in the sale of their membership interests to Centauri Health Solutions, Inc.
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston is pleased to have represented the owners of Ivy Ventures, LLC, in the sale of their membership interests to Centauri Health Solutions, Inc.
Whiteford, Taylor and Preston is pleased to announce that U.S. News and World Report - Best Lawyers® “Best Law Firms” has awarded the firm exemplary rankings for 2021. Twenty-two of the firm’s practices are ranked at the national level, and the firm’s Bankruptcy and Environmental Law practices have been recognized with national Tier 1 rankings.
Whiteford, Taylor and Preston is pleased to announce that U.S. News and World Report - Best Lawyers® “Best Law Firms” has awarded the firm exemplary rankings for 2021. Twenty-two of the firm’s practices are ranked at the national level, and the firm’s Bankruptcy and Environmental Law practices have been recognized with national Tier 1 rankings.
Four lawyers from Whiteford, Taylor & Preston have been named to the Benchmark Litigation 40 & Under Hotlist: Todd Brooks, Aaron Casagrande, Cara Murray, David Stevens.
Four lawyers from Whiteford, Taylor & Preston have been named to the Benchmark Litigation 40 & Under Hotlist: Todd Brooks, Aaron Casagrande, Cara Murray, David Stevens.
A record 71 lawyers from Whiteford, Taylor & Preston have been selected by their peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® 2021 (copyright 2020 by Woodward/White, Inc., of Aiken S.C.). The lawyers selected are based in the firm’s Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Washington offices. Client comments are posted on the U.S. News & Best Lawyers web site, at bestlawfirms.com.
A record 71 lawyers from Whiteford, Taylor & Preston have been selected by their peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® 2021 (copyright 2020 by Woodward/White, Inc., of Aiken S.C.). The lawyers selected are based in the firm’s Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Washington offices. Client comments are posted on the U.S. News & Best Lawyers web site, at bestlawfirms.com.
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston is pleased to announce that Chambers and Partners has once again ranked the firm highly in its 2020 list of leading firms and business lawyers. This year’s recognition includes 23 attorneys in 10 practice areas in 3 states and the District of Columbia.
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston is pleased to announce that Chambers and Partners has once again ranked the firm highly in its 2020 list of leading firms and business lawyers. This year’s recognition includes 23 attorneys in 10 practice areas in 3 states and the District of Columbia.
Whiteford, Taylor and Preston is pleased to announce that U.S. News and World Report - Best Lawyers ® “Best Law Firms” has awarded the firm exemplary rankings for 2020. Twenty of the firm’s practices are ranked at the national level, including two bankruptcy practices with national Tier 1 rankings. At the state level, an additional forty-two practices have been ranked in Maryland, Washington, D.C., and VA.
Whiteford, Taylor and Preston is pleased to announce that U.S. News and World Report - Best Lawyers ® “Best Law Firms” has awarded the firm exemplary rankings for 2020. Twenty of the firm’s practices are ranked at the national level, including two bankruptcy practices with national Tier 1 rankings. At the state level, an additional forty-two practices have been ranked in Maryland, Washington, D.C., and VA.
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston is proud to have represented the selling owners of Accumark, Inc., Pipe Vision, LLC and Benchmark VA LLC Subsurface Utility Services (collectively, “Accumark”) in their sale to Hoffman Southwest, a rapidly growing provider of water flow inspection, repair and cleaning services.
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston is proud to have represented the selling owners of Accumark, Inc., Pipe Vision, LLC and Benchmark VA LLC Subsurface Utility Services (collectively, “Accumark”) in their sale to Hoffman Southwest, a rapidly growing provider of water flow inspection, repair and cleaning services.
64 lawyers from Whiteford, Taylor & Preston have been selected by their peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® 2020. The lawyers selected are based in the firm’s Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Washington offices. Client comments are posted on the U.S. News & Best Lawyers web site, at bestlawfirms.com.
64 lawyers from Whiteford, Taylor & Preston have been selected by their peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America® 2020. The lawyers selected are based in the firm’s Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Washington offices. Client comments are posted on the U.S. News & Best Lawyers web site, at bestlawfirms.com.
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston is pleased to announce that twenty of its attorneys are listed among the 2019 Super Lawyers and Rising Stars in D.C., Pennsylvania and Virginia.
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston is pleased to announce that twenty of its attorneys are listed among the 2019 Super Lawyers and Rising Stars in D.C., Pennsylvania and Virginia.
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston is pleased to announce that Chambers and Partners has once again ranked the firm highly in its 2019 list of leading firms and business lawyers.
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston is pleased to announce that Chambers and Partners has once again ranked the firm highly in its 2019 list of leading firms and business lawyers.
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston is pleased to announce that U.S. News and World Report - Best Lawyers ® “Best Law Firms” has awarded the firm exemplary rankings for 2019. Eighteen of the firm’s practices are ranked at the national level, including two practices with national Tier 1 rankings: Litigation and Bankruptcy. At the state level, an additional forty-six practices have been ranked in Maryland, Washington, D.C., and VA.
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston is pleased to announce that U.S. News and World Report - Best Lawyers ® “Best Law Firms” has awarded the firm exemplary rankings for 2019. Eighteen of the firm’s practices are ranked at the national level, including two practices with national Tier 1 rankings: Litigation and Bankruptcy. At the state level, an additional forty-six practices have been ranked in Maryland, Washington, D.C., and VA.
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston is pleased to announce that Chambers and Partners has once again ranked the firm highly in its 2018 list of leading firms and business lawyers. This year’s recognition includes 29 attorneys in a record 12 practice areas in 4 states, the District of Columbia and Afghanistan.
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston is pleased to announce that Chambers and Partners has once again ranked the firm highly in its 2018 list of leading firms and business lawyers. This year’s recognition includes 29 attorneys in a record 12 practice areas in 4 states, the District of Columbia and Afghanistan.
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston is pleased to announce that Chambers and Partners has once again ranked the firm highly in its 2017 list of leading firms and business lawyers. This year’s recognition includes a record 29 attorneys in 4 states, the District of Columbia and Afghanistan.
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston is pleased to announce that Chambers and Partners has once again ranked the firm highly in its 2017 list of leading firms and business lawyers. This year’s recognition includes a record 29 attorneys in 4 states, the District of Columbia and Afghanistan.
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston is pleased to announce that 41 of its attorneys are listed among the 2017 Super Lawyers and Rising Stars in Maryland and Kentucky joining the sixteen who were listed earlier this year in Delaware, D.C., Pennsylvania and Virginia.
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston is pleased to announce that 41 of its attorneys are listed among the 2017 Super Lawyers and Rising Stars in Maryland and Kentucky joining the sixteen who were listed earlier this year in Delaware, D.C., Pennsylvania and Virginia.
As a reminder to all clients, the DOL Final Regulations which substantially modified the salary basis test for exempt employees under federal Wage and Hour laws, will go into effect on December 1. As discussed in our client alert when the regulations were issued, these regulations will more than double the current required salary for certain exempt employees. Employers who have not reviewed their current staffing to determine how these regulations will affect them, should do so now.
As a reminder to all clients, the DOL Final Regulations which substantially modified the salary basis test for exempt employees under federal Wage and Hour laws, will go into effect on December 1. As discussed in our client alert when the regulations were issued, these regulations will more than double the current required salary for certain exempt employees. Employers who have not reviewed their current staffing to determine how these regulations will affect them, should do so now.
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston is pleased to announce that, in addition to ranking the firm highly in its 2016 list of Maryland’s leading firms and business lawyers, Chambers and Partners have added new Whiteford lawyers in Maryland and Delaware.
The practice group rankings are based on the high rankings of 21 individual lawyers.
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston is pleased to announce that, in addition to ranking the firm highly in its 2016 list of Maryland’s leading firms and business lawyers, Chambers and Partners have added new Whiteford lawyers in Maryland and Delaware.
The practice group rankings are based on the high rankings of 21 individual lawyers.
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston is pleased to announce that the 2015 edition of Chambers USA recognizes 17 of its lawyers as leaders in their fields and, in addition, has ranked six of Whiteford’s practice areas.
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston is pleased to announce that the 2015 edition of Chambers USA recognizes 17 of its lawyers as leaders in their fields and, in addition, has ranked six of Whiteford’s practice areas.
Whiteford Taylor & Preston LLP is very gratified to announce that the firm has once again received exemplary ratings in the fifth annual U.S. News & World Report rankings of law firms.
Whiteford Taylor & Preston LLP is very gratified to announce that the firm has once again received exemplary ratings in the fifth annual U.S. News & World Report rankings of law firms.
Please attend WTP's 22nd Annual 2008 Employment Law Update Seminar
Friday, October 3rd
The Tremont Grand
225 N. Charles Street, Baltimore MD
8:30 am - 3:15 pm
Please join us for this educational and informative all-day seminar dedicated exclusively to employment related issues and concerns for our clients and friends of the firm. Our workshop format allows you to learn from WTP attorneys and your peers.
Please attend WTP's 22nd Annual 2008 Employment Law Update Seminar
Friday, October 3rd
The Tremont Grand
225 N. Charles Street, Baltimore MD
8:30 am - 3:15 pm
Please join us for this educational and informative all-day seminar dedicated exclusively to employment related issues and concerns for our clients and friends of the firm. Our workshop format allows you to learn from WTP attorneys and your peers.
Please attend WTP's 21st Annual 2007 Employment Law Update Seminar
Wednesday, October 10th
Tremont Grand Hotel
225 N. Charles Street, Baltimore MD
8:30 am - 3:15 pm
You are cordially invited to an all-day seminar dedicated exclusively to employment-related issues and concerns for our clients and friends of the firm. The workshop format allows you to learn from WTP attorneys and your peers. We hope that you will be able to join us for this educational and informative day.
Guest Speaker: J. Ronald DeJuliis, Maryland Commissioner of Labor & Industry
Please attend WTP's 21st Annual 2007 Employment Law Update Seminar
Wednesday, October 10th
Tremont Grand Hotel
225 N. Charles Street, Baltimore MD
8:30 am - 3:15 pm
You are cordially invited to an all-day seminar dedicated exclusively to employment-related issues and concerns for our clients and friends of the firm. The workshop format allows you to learn from WTP attorneys and your peers. We hope that you will be able to join us for this educational and informative day.
Guest Speaker: J. Ronald DeJuliis, Maryland Commissioner of Labor & Industry
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston LLP (WTP) is pleased to announce that 36 WTP attorneys have been named in Maryland Super Lawyers publication. Maryland Super Lawyers will appear in a special advertising section in the January 2007 issue of BaltimoreMagazine and in the Maryland Super Lawyers magazine.
Whiteford, Taylor & Preston LLP (WTP) is pleased to announce that 36 WTP attorneys have been named in Maryland Super Lawyers publication. Maryland Super Lawyers will appear in a special advertising section in the January 2007 issue of BaltimoreMagazine and in the Maryland Super Lawyers magazine.
This will be our 20th year of an all-day seminar dedicated exclusively to employment-related issues and concerns for our clients and friends of the firm. We hope that you will be able to join us for this educational and informative day
The workshop format allows you to learn from WTP attorneys and your peers.
This will be our 20th year of an all-day seminar dedicated exclusively to employment-related issues and concerns for our clients and friends of the firm. We hope that you will be able to join us for this educational and informative day
The workshop format allows you to learn from WTP attorneys and your peers.
January 4, 2006 - Baltimore, MD - Whiteford, Taylor & Preston (WTP) is pleased to announce that James P. Gillece and Jeanne M. Phelan have been named as leading practitioners in the field of Labor and Employment Law by Who's Who Legal.
Their names appear in Who's Who Legal: USA - Management Labour & Employment, a new publication produced by the highly respected British survey group that has produced the International Who's Who of Business Lawyers for many years.
January 4, 2006 - Baltimore, MD - Whiteford, Taylor & Preston (WTP) is pleased to announce that James P. Gillece and Jeanne M. Phelan have been named as leading practitioners in the field of Labor and Employment Law by Who's Who Legal.
Their names appear in Who's Who Legal: USA - Management Labour & Employment, a new publication produced by the highly respected British survey group that has produced the International Who's Who of Business Lawyers for many years.
