Skip to main content

What I've Been Reading This Week


With nearly 200 posts this year, we have certainly run the gamut on employment and labor law developments, ranging from minimum wage hikes, President Donald Trump's first nominee for Labor Secretary unexpectedly withdrawing, right to work developments (including right to work zones), increased attention on sexual harassment claims in the workplace, the National Labor Relations Board taking on a 3 - 2 Republican majority, and the subsequent reversal of the 2015 Browning-Ferris joint employer decision.

Of course, that is not even touching on the many decisions handed down by courts across the country over the past twelve months that addressed whether an employer discriminated against an employee with a medical marijuana card simply because she was a card holder (Callaghan v. Darlington Fabrics),  yet another case that considered if time spent in security screenings after clocking out was compensable time (Vance v. Amazon.com, Inc. et al.), a Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals case that addressed whether an employer unlawfully failed to accommodate an employee that asked for a religious accommodation request after objecting to the use of a hand scanner at work that interfered with the employee's religious beliefs (EEOC v. CONSOL Energy, Inc.), and a case that considered if rescinding an offer of employment because an applicant engaged in protected activity was unlawful...spoiler alert, it was (Linkletter v. Western & Southern Financial Group, Inc.), among many other noteworthy cases.

Many thanks to all the readers for following along throughout the many developments this year.  I am looking forward to the new year ahead with another wide range of employment and labor law developments to share.

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


Microsoft Eliminates Forced Arbitration Agreements For Sexual Harassment Claims

A few weeks ago, Microsoft made what I consider to be a major announcement with its decision to no longer require employees to pursue sexual harassment claims via arbitration (rather than in court.)  Going one step further, the company also endorsed a bill introduced in the U.S. Congress by Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (Democrat from New York) and Senator Lindsey Graham (Republican from South Carolina) that would prohibit companies from contractually requiring employees to settle these types of cases behind closed doors in arbitration.  As noted by Nick Wingfield and Jessica Silver-Greenberg at The New York Times, Microsoft becomes one of the first major companies to directly address sexual harassment policies in its workplace.


New Year, New Wage: A Breakdown of Minimum Wage Hikes in 2018

For many readers, the past year has been somewhat difficult (if not confusing) trying to follow the range of (proposed) minimum wage hikes across the country.  Do not worry, CNN Money recently put out a concise breakdown of minimum wage hikes in the coming year for many cities and states.  Something tells me we are likely to see many more cities and states added to this list over the coming twelve months.


Unions Are Spending Big Money to Fight Missouri Right to Work Law

After many failed attempts, in February, Republicans in Missouri were able to approve a right to work bill that Republican Governor Eric Greitens signed.  However, opponents of the right to work law mobilized and collected enough signatures to suspend the law and place it on the 2018 ballot for Missouri voters to decide upon.  Given how proactive opponents of the right to work legislation have been, it should come as little surprise that unions have started to ramp up spending in the state to contest the law ahead of next year's vote.  In fact, over the past few months, nearly $2 million has poured into efforts to defeat the right to work law.  This one still has a long ways to go until election day next November, but this referendum in Missouri could prove to be a seminal moment for right to work laws.

Comments

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,...

NLRB: Former Employee Cannot Be Barred From Work Premises After Filing Wage Suit

MEI-GSR Holdings, LLC - NLRB Facts :  MEI-GSR Holdings, LLC d/b/a Grand Sierra Resort & Casino ("GSR") operated a facility that included a hotel, casino, restaurant, clubs, bars, and a pool which were all open to the general public.  Tiffany Sargent ("Sargent") was briefly employed by GSR as a "beverage supervisor" in December of 2012.  After her employment ended, Sargent continued to socialize at one of the clubs.  GSR had a long standing practice of allowing former employees to patronize its facility and did not prohibit Sargent from doing so.  In June of 2013, Sargent and another employee filed a class and collective action against GSR for alleged unpaid wages, in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and Nevada law.  In July of 2014, GSR denied Sargent access to an event at one of the clubs.  GSR followed up with a letter and stated that with the on-going litigation (from the wage suit), it decided to bar Sargent from the premises. ...

San Diego Rolls Back Vaccine Mandate For City Workers

Last Tuesday, the San Diego City Council voted to do away with the vaccine mandate for city employees. The city’s vaccine mandate that was in place required city workers to get the coronavirus vaccine or risk termination.  Perhaps to this surprise of no one, the city’s policy came under fire with 14 employees being terminated and over 100 other employees resigning.  With the coronavirus subsiding, including in Southern California, the San Diego City Council took action. Now, bear in mind, the repeal of the vaccine mandate does not take place immediately. With that being said, the mandate will be repealed March 8th.  I suppose the question now is, what other cities or regions follow San Diego’s lead? For additional information:   https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/politics/story/2023-01-24/san-diego-repeals-controversial-covid-19-vaccine-mandate-citing-drop-in-cases-hospitalizations