The Majority Opinion: Legal Blog

Corbin v. Time Warner Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse Partnership - Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Facts :  Andre Corbin ("Corbin") worked for Time Warner at one of its call centers in California.  After May 4, 2010, employees were to use an online timekeeping system to keep track of their hours worked.  At the time, Time Warner had a "rounding" policy in place.  As a result, all employees (including Corbin) had their clock-ins and clock outs rounded to the nearest quarter hour.  Since the implementation of the timekeeping system, Corbin gained compensation or broke even 58% of the time.  However, based upon an agreement by both Corbin and Time Warner, as a result of the rounding policy, Corbin lost $15.02 in wages from May 5, 2010 to his resignation on June 15, 2011.   Corbin subsequently filed a claim on the grounds that Time Warner's rounding policy deprived him of the full amount of his earned wages (specifically, overtime compensation).  The distr

Some readers might be avid tennis fans.  Some may have happened to notice the start of the French Open on Sunday in Paris.  Others may simply be interested in the continuing dialogue over equal pay.  Well, I have some good news:  This topic covers all those high points. In comments to The New York Times earlier this month, Madrid Open owner, Ion Tiriac, suggested that his tennis tournament might look to move away from equal pay for male and female players.  In his comments to the Times , Tiriac stated that while female players may deserve more (in pay), it is important to calculate how much money male and female tennis players actually put on the table.  In his view, female players are not bringing in as much revenue as male players and therefore might not be "entitled" to equal pay going forward.  Tiriac went so far as to state he could struggle to pay equal prize money in future tournaments:  "If I increase the women's [pay], too, I am broke and I don'

A few months ago, I pointed readers to an equal pay bill that was sitting on New Jersey Governor Chris Christie's desk .  That bill, which passed both chambers of the state's legislature would have banned employers from paying women less for "substantially similar" work as men and would have allowed differing pay rates between genders only if employers could prove it was based on something besides sex (such as education, experience, performance, etc.).   One of the concerns with this equal pay bill is that under the language passed by the state legislature, women would be paid equally if they were doing the same tasks in a different role.  Compare this with most equal pay bills which require equal pay for the exact same work. I had expressed my skepticism about whether the Governor would sign this legislation into law as he had vetoed two similar bills previously.  It turns out, I was right.  Governor Christie vetoed the legislation on the grounds that it w

To the surprise of few, minimum wage has continued to be a hot button issue.  With Donald Trump recently shifting his position on the issue, I think it is likely the topic will remain a centerpiece of the Presidential campaigns through November.  On that note, I wanted to highlight a few recent developments across the country on the issue. As always, below are a few articles that caught my eye this week. Cleveland City Council to Consider Minimum Wage Hike From the NBC affiliate in Cleveland, it has been reported that the Cleveland City Council is to consider a petition that requests a minimum wage hike in the city.  The petition seeks $15/hour, up from Ohio's current minimum wage rate of $8.10/hour.  Stay tuned as this one progresses. The Continued Fight For Workers in Seattle to Actually Receive the Right Minimum Wage Heidi Groover over at the Stranger has an in depth note on the struggle among some minimum wage workers in Seattle to actually receive the correct

Today, the Department of Labor finalized new overtime regulations that will impact countless workers in the United States.  Under current regulations, individuals that are classified as executives and managers are exempt from overtime regulations.  As well, salaried workers do not have to be paid overtime if they make at least $23,660.00 per year (which amounts to $455.00 per week).   With the Department of Labor's new overtime regulations, effective December 1, 2016, the salary threshold at which white collar workers are exempt from overtime pay will be raised to $47,476.00 per year (or $913 per week).  (Meaning that if a white collar worker makes less than $47,476.00 per year, they will likely be entitled to time and a half overtime pay for all hours worked over 40 per week).  Note, this threshold will be updated every three years and be tied to a segment of salaried workers in the lowest income region of the United States.  According to the Department of Labor's esti

Medical marijuana is one of the emerging labor & employment topics that is starting to show up in workplaces across the country (along with transgender matters).  In the Northeast, both Pennsylvania and Ohio are at the forefront of the issue as both states have either legalized medical marijuana (Pennsylvania) or appear close to doing so (Ohio).  The question then inevitably turns to how this impacts employers and employees in each state. In Pennsylvania, the state is set to legalize medical marijuana after the state legislature passed Senate Bill No. 3 and Governor Tom Wolf is expected to sign it into law.  Under the law, as it relates to medical marijuana in the workplace, employers in the state will be prohibited from discharging, threatening, refusing to hire or otherwise discriminating or retaliating against an employee on the basis of that employee's status as a person certified to use medical marijuana.  Before employers start to get worried, the law does not requ

Earlier this week I pointed readers to the settlement of two class action suits filed against Uber.  However, a new suit was recently filed against the company on behalf of all U.S. Uber drivers (who are not in Massachusetts and California...as those drivers were involved in the prior two class actions).  This new suit alleges that Uber misclassified its drivers as independent contractors, failed to pay overtime wages and compensation, owes its drivers expense reimbursement and failed to turn over gratuities.  I think it is appropriate to lead off this post with an article dedicated to that topic. As always, below are a few articles that caught my eye this week. A Closer Look at the New Lawsuit Filed Against Uber Erik Sherman over at Forbes has a good look at the recent lawsuit filed against Uber.  Sherman, who wrote an update on the pending settlement of the prior two class actions, breaks down the basics of what this new suit seeks.  As he writes, it might be in Uber

Recently, House Bill 511 was introduced by state Rep. Christie Kuhns in the Ohio legislature which would provide paid sick leave for employees in the state.   Under the proposed legislation, an employee would be able to receive family and medical leave insurance benefits for any reason for which an employee would otherwise qualify for unpaid leave under the Family Medical Leave Act ("FMLA").  The question that always follows is who would fall under this proposal?  According to the current language in the bill, any employee who has worked for the employer for at least 680 hours in four of the past five completed calendar quarters would be covered.  The bill would enact a sliding scale of benefits for these covered employees based upon their income levels.  The range would go from 95% of an employee's average weekly wage for the lowest earners up to 66% for the highest.   Others have noted that this legislation likely will not pass, given the Republican makeup o

Recently, it was announced that Uber had agreed to pay nearly $100 million to drivers to settle two class action lawsuits filed against the company.  Those suits involved disputes over whether Uber drivers were improperly characterized as independent contractors rather than employees.  The class actions argued the drivers were entitled to reimbursements for overtime, fuel, maintenance expenses, and tip money that they alleged had been withheld by the company.  I thought this would be a good time to highlight these cases so readers have an idea of the magnitude of this settlement. Uber's Statement on the Settlement of the Two Class Action Lawsuits Direct from Uber's Newsroom, there is a press release which breaks down the agreed upon settlement with specifics on what Uber will pay (and provide to its drivers) to settle the case.  For those looking for a quick reference on what is being settled, this is a good place to start. Uber Settles Suits & Prevails...At

Morriss v. BNSF Railway - Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals Facts :  Melvin Morriss ("Morriss") applied to be a machinist at BNSF.  BNSF offered him the job but made it contingent upon him passing the company's standard medical review.  BNSF had a policy not to hire new applicants for safety sensitive positions (such as a machinist) if the applicant had a body mass index ("BMI") 40 or over.  After two exams, Morriss was found to have a BMI of 40.9 and 40.4.  As a result, BNSF revoked the conditional job offer on the grounds that Morriss was "[n]ot currently qualified for the safety sensitive Machinist position due to significant health and safety risks associated with Class 3 obesity ([BMI] of 40 or greater)." Morriss subsequently sued BNSF for disability discrimination on the grounds that his obesity was a disability and that he was regarded as disabled by BNSF.  BNSF moved for summary judgment and argued that obesity is not a disability cov

I had a very short week in the office with a lot of out of town work trips.  As a result, I had less time than I would have liked to read through some labor & employment law articles.  With that being said, I came across a great note on dealing with employee handbook acknowledgments that I think readers would find helpful.   As always, below are a few articles that caught my eye this week. A Few Helpful Suggestions on Employee Handbook Acknowledgments Eric Meyer has some helpful suggestions on employee handbooks, in particular as it relates to the acknowledgment portion.  Granted, every situation is different and every suggestion might not apply, but this article is worth a review for those in HR or those who deal with employee handbooks on a routine basis. Donald Trump Expresses Support For a Change in Minimum Wage Rate Readers might remember a post from a few weeks ago that I wrote on where the (then) 5 remaining Presidential candidates stood on the minimum

On April 11, Missouri Governor Jay Nixon signed Executive Order 16-04 which will ban the box in state employment by placing questions in regard to an applicant's criminal history later in the hiring process.  As with most ban the box measures, this is done to provide all applicants with a fair opportunity to compete for jobs, without a criminal background impacting a hiring decision.  Governor Nixon stated that the Executive Order is about "fairness" and is intended to give applicants a chance to "redeem their lives, support their families and make a contribution to their communities...".  This ban the box measure is surprising in so much that it was done by Executive Order, rather than by an act of the state legislature.  While this action will not impact private sector employers (and employees), it will directly impact all departments, agencies, boards, and commissions in Missouri's executive branch.  Translation = this is far from a drop in the buc

As with many employment and labor law cases (and bills) being litigated around the country, there are always a few that stand out.  This is one to keep an eye on. Recently, the Pregnancy Reasonable Accommodation Act was introduced in the Ohio Senate.  Under Senate Bill 301, pregnancy would be a protected disability. Under the Bill, employers would be required to provide reasonable accommodations to pregnant employees.  Naturally, the question then becomes what is a reasonable accommodation.  Under this proposed legislation, "reasonable accommodation" includes more frequent or longer breaks; acquisition or modification of equipment, seating, or uniforms; assistance with manual labor; light duty; modified employment schedules; etc.   However, one of the more striking parts of this Bill is the fact that a pregnant employee would not have to "accept an accommodation that the employee chooses not to accept." (!!!!).  Readers might remember that under the A