Skip to main content

What I've Been Reading This Week

I do not come across too many articles that also fall into the immigration category, even though I have several friends and readers of the blog who practice in that field.  With that being said, I recently came across a ruling that dealt with an I-9 related issue that proved to be very costly for the employer (to the tune of over $200,000.00 in penalties).  So for those of my readers who also practice in the immigration field, this post is for you!

As always, below are a few articles that caught my eye this week.


Ensuring There are No Hiccups When Implementing a Sick Leave Plan

This is a really well written article from the Orrick Blog.  They really know their stuff and write several articles that I always enjoy reading.  This particular one deals with how an employer can ensure there are limited hiccups when a sick leave plan is implemented.  Granted, there are bound to be obstacles and unforeseen issues that crop up, but this is worth a read on how some of those pitfalls can be avoided.



Recently, a decision was handed down by the US Department of Justice Executive Office for Immigration Review which uphold penalties imposed by Immigration and Customs Enforcement for an employer's "technical" I-9 violation.  The big takeaway from this ruling is that the individual who signs Section 2 of the I-9 form (on the employer's side) MUST be the same individual that reviewed the original employment verification documents presented by the employee. 


Uber: Changing Transportation & Also the Labor Market

The New York Times had a good note on how Uber's success and tremendous growth have fueled other companies to model their business plans after Uber.  In particular, the way that Uber utilizes and mobilizes its workforce is quite unique, and as the article points out, a trend that other companies seem to be following.  Can Uber change more than just the transportation industry?  I'd say yes, given the impact it has had on the labor market so far.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum, it was noted that emplo
Post a Comment
Read more

What I’ve Been Reading This Week

A few years ago, I remember when the “Fight for $15” movement was taking off around the country.  Lo and behold, it appears that a $15/hour minimum wage is not the stopping point, which should be no surprise.  As the below article notes, New York is aggressively moving to ramp up hourly wage rates even higher.  While all the  below articles are worth a read, I called particular attention to that one. As always, below are a couple article that caught my eye this week. Disney World Workers Reject Latest Contract Offer Late last week, it was announced that workers at Disney World had rejected the most recent contract offer from the company, calling on their employer to do better.  As Brooks Barnes at The New York Times writes, the unions that represent about 32,000 workers at Disney World reported their members resoundingly rejected the 5 year contract offer which would have seen workers receive a 10% raise and retroactive increased back pay.  While Disney’s offer would have increased pa
Post a Comment
Read more

Utah Non-Compete Bill Falters in House

Last month, a non-compete bill sponsored by Representative Brian Greene (Republican from Pleasant Grove) & up for vote in the Utah House failed to make it through the Legislature.  The bill sought to ban enforcement of non-competes if they came after a worker was already employed, given no compensation (such as a bonus or promotion) for signing the non-compete, and laid off within six months.  However, by a 22 - 49 vote, the bill was resoundingly defeated after some business groups lobbied to kill the non-compete bill.  One group in particular, The Free Enterprise Utah coalition, argued that the Utah State Legislature should hold off on any changes to non compete laws in the state until a survey about non competes was done among Utah businesses.  Representative Greene had countered this claim and argued that a survey was not needed to show that the current non compete laws in the states allowed many businesses, including some small high tech companies in the state, to per
Post a Comment
Read more