Skip to main content

What I've Been Reading This Week


Every so often I come across an interesting ERISA case or compelling article on the topic.  This week, I read a thorough case analysis of a recent ERISA case out of the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals that dealt with a venue selection clause.  While ERISA might not be an everyday matter that readers deal with in the workplace, I highlight this article to give readers a broad overview of a wide range of employment and labor law topics.

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


Consistency Is Key With Restrictive Covenants in Employment Agreements

Consistency, consistency, consistency.  If there is one takeaway from Melissa Dunn's article about employers attempting to utilize and enforce restrictive covenants, this is the message to key in on.  I point readers in particular to the "lessons for employers" provided at the end.  However, note that while consistency (in terms of enforcement) is vital, Melissa is careful to differentiate and establish that consistency does not necessarily mean sticking to the same non-compete agreement for all employees.  Food for thought.


Illinois Governor Vetoes $15/Hour Minimum Wage Legislation

Recently, Illinois Republican Governor Bruce Rauner vetoed a bill that would have raised hourly minimum wage rates in the state up to $15/hour by 2022.  The current hourly rate, $8.25, would have been raised to $9/hour in January and gradually increased to the $15/hour threshold by 2022.  While Governor Rauner's veto should not come as much of a surprise, had the legislation been approved, Illinois would have joined California and New York as the third state to pass $15/hour legislation.  As Alexia Elejadle-Ruiz at The Los Angeles Times writes, while state lawmakers could attempt to override Rauner's veto, there do not appear to be enough votes to do so.  For the time being, the "Fight for $15" has stalled out in Illinois.


Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals Rules on ERISA Plan's Venue Selection Clause

At the start of August, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals issued an opinion in In re Mathias in which the Court held in a 2 - 1 split decision that a venue selection provision in an employee benefit plan governed by ERISA was enforceable and was not inconsistent with ERISA's venue provision in ERISA Section 502(e)(2).  Interesting to note this was a case of first impression for the Seventh Circuit (and tracked a similar decision from the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals).  For those looking for a rather in depth and thorough analysis of In re Mathias, this article from The National Law Review is worth a read.

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