United States executive agencies are practically always on the same page when presenting to the public. So, it is incredibly unusual to see two such agencies taking positions directly contrary to one another in pending litigation. This, however, is exactly the current situation between the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ),
Employment Laws
Join us for a Free Background Screening Webinar on October 18
Troutman Sanders’ lawyers Wendy Sugg and Megan Nicholls will co-present this free background screening webinar. Participants will learn about:
- General versus confidential personnel files;
- Access to employee records and files;
- Record keeping and compliance;
- Background screening policies and procedures;
- Training parameters to ensure compliance; and
- L.A. Fair Chance Initiative and
…
Employee Use Of Marijuana: The Law Is Hazy For Employers
You may have seen the news that the City of Atlanta recently passed an ordinance decriminalizing the possession of less than one ounce of marijuana. Individuals found in possession of such small amounts of marijuana will now be fined $75 and face no jail time. Earlier this year, Georgia enacted…
DACA: What Its Undoing Means For Employers
Last month, the Trump Administration announced plans to end President Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (“DACA”) program. This change in policy is sure to have a significant impact on employers.
First, a little background on DACA. Beginning in the 1990s, illegal immigration from Central and South America changed. Illegal…
Much Ado About Nothing: Closing the Door on Higher Salary Requirements for Overtime Exemptions
For those who missed it while getting an early start to their Labor Day weekend, late last week a federal judge closed the door on regulations that would have significantly changed overtime exemptions after previously leaving that door ajar.
Most employers became very familiar — and concerned — with the…
Could The EEOC Sue Over Your “Maximum Leave” Policy?
Earlier this month, a widely-recognized Fortune 50 company reached a $1.7 million agreement with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to resolve nearly a decade of litigation over the company’s nation-wide policy of discharging workers who do not return from medical leave after 12 months.
While this settlement still requires approval by a federal judge, the litigation itself (and the size and scope of the settlement, which also includes changes to the company’s policy, notice-posting, record-keeping, reporting, and other requirements) should be instructive for employers dealing with a common issue: what to do with employees who are granted a medical leave but cannot return to duty at the end of a set time period.
Employer Readiness in the Current State of Heightened Employer Inspections
One of President Trump’s chief agenda items has been immigration enforcement. While the President’s intent may be to keep out terrorists, remove undocumented foreign nationals, and eliminate fraudulent visa practices, these efforts can also have a tremendous impact on U.S. employers. One of the ways this administration has ramped up…
Words Matter: Reasons for Separation and Unemployment Benefits
By Matt Anderson on June 13, 2017
Employers large and small regularly turn over employees. Employees quit to take care of their families, resign to take other jobs, or are fired. Also, many employers, particularly ones whose employees are unionized, will lay off or suspend employees. The reason for…
Handling An Employee Who Won’t Shake Hands For Religious Reasons
Religious issues in the workplace are challenging both from a legal and practical standpoint. Managers and HR professionals want employees to feel accepted and included, and they don’t want anyone to feel targeted or mistreated based on their religious beliefs or practices. Problems can arise, however, where an employee’s religious practices interfere with the employee’s job or professional interactions. How do you accommodate the employee’s beliefs while also ensuring that the employee meets the job’s requirements?
The Defend Trade Secrets Act: What Does it Really Mean for Employers? The Good, the Bad and the Ambiguous, Part 4
In Part 1 and Part 2 of this series of posts, we began the discussion of what the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA), enacted in May 2016, really means for employers in defending their trade secrets. In particular, we addressed some of the “good” the DTSA offers for employers, including: (1) a clear path to federal court, (2) ex parte seizure orders and (3) international application. In Part 3, we addressed the bad — four potential downsides of the DTSA for employers, including mandatory disclosure of whistleblower protections. In this final Part 4, we outline questions left unanswered by the DTSA which are worth watching for future developments.