In an important decision under the Fair Labor Standards Act, the Supreme Court has issued a ruling in Busk v. Integrity Staffing Solutions, Inc. in favor of employers. As previously discussed in October, the Court had to determine whether employers are required to pay their hourly employees for time spent going through an anti-theft security clearance at the end of … Continue Reading
As 2014 comes to a close, employers must be aware of the pending increase in wages for their nonexempt employees. Florida’s minimum wage will increase to $8.05 on January 1, 2015. With the increase, Florida’s required minimum wage is nearly one dollar more than the federal minimum wage ($7.25). On September 30th of each year, Florida’s Department of Economic Opportunity … Continue Reading
The Supreme Court will soon decide whether employers will be required to pay their employees for time spent going through a security clearance at the end of each shift. The case is Busk v. Integrity Staffing Solutions, Inc., 713 F.3d 525 (9th Cir. 2013). The Court heard oral arguments on October 8, 2014.… Continue Reading
On November 26, 2013, the Supreme Court of the United States agreed to hear challenges to the requirement that employer-provided health insurance include certain contraceptive methods. The Supreme Court will consider two cases: Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., et al., v. Sebelius, et al. from the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals and Conestoga Wood Specialties Corp., et al. v. Sebelius, et … Continue Reading
Congress is currently considering the creation of a new protected class for purposes of workplace discrimination. The Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) would create a new federally-protected class of individuals: lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender applicants and employees. Generally, ENDA will prohibit employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity by covered entities. Most states do not have … Continue Reading
Recently, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar, which addresses the causation standard for retaliation claims under Title VII. The Supreme Court has already held that Title VII permits plaintiffs to pursue discrimination claims on a mixed motive theory. A plaintiff only needs to prove that discrimination was a motivating factor … Continue Reading
The Supreme Court recently held oral arguments in the case Vance v. Ball State University, 646 F.3d 461 (7th Cir. 2011), which addresses the meaning of a “supervisor” in hostile work environment claims. If the Court applies a broad definition, the decision may have negative implications for employers defending against hostile work environment claims.
When faced with a hostile … Continue Reading
On August 20, 2012, the Eleventh Circuit held in Seff v. Broward County, Florida that the ADA’s safe harbor provision allows employers to deduct a fee from the paychecks of employees who choose not to participate in a wellness program.
Broward County offers its employees a group health insurance plan. Beginning in 2009, employees enrolling in the plan became eligible … Continue Reading
In June 2011, the Supreme Court rejected the certification of a class of 1.5 million female employees of Wal-Mart Stores, finding that the plaintiffs’ claims lacked commonality. Following this ruling, the plaintiffs in the Dukes case amended their original complaint, alleging claims of sex discrimination that only included women in Wal-Mart’s California regions. Shortly thereafter, a regional suit against Wal-Mart … Continue Reading
On March 2, 2012, Judge Amy Berman Jackson of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia held that the National Labor Relations Board (“Board”) lawfully promulgated Subpart A of its Rule, “Notification of Employee Rights under the National Labor Relations Act” which requires employers to post a notice of employee rights. However, the Board exceeded its authority … Continue Reading