Of all the years that I have been writing this blog, this year’s readership was head and shoulders above any prior year by far. I suppose that should not be much of a surprise, given the wide range of labor law developments over the past twelve months including the United States Supreme Court issuing the much anticipated decision in Janus v. AFSCME, the NLRB vacating the Browning-Ferris joint employer decision and its subsequent move to formally codify the Hy-Brand joint employer standard, Missouri voters rejecting the state's right to work law with nearly 68% voting against it, the Seventh Circuit issuing an opinion in September that struck down right to work zones in Illinois, the Fifth Circuit issuing an opinion in the summer that held that In-N-Out Burger cannot prevent employees from wearing "Fight for $15" buttons on their uniforms, the Department of Labor ("DOL") implementing an 'amnesty' program for employers to pay back wages to employees without consequence, rescinding the Persuader Rule, and also issuing a controversial decision to rescind the 80/20 rule for tip guidance.
As for employment law news, the Supreme Court was busy with an April opinion that held that service advisors are exempt from FLSA overtime requirements, a May decision that found workplace arbitration agreements that bar class actions are lawful, and a November opinion that held the ADEA applies to all state and local governments regardless of size. Of course, do not forget rulings from other courts including the California Supreme Court's decision that adopted the ABC test to determine whether a worker is an independent contractor or an employee, a federal district court in New York that held the celebrity status of a party is not a reason for keeping FLSA settlements confidential, a federal court in Ohio issuing a decision that held USERRA does not provide a cause of action for adverse employment actions against a military spouse, and a federal district court in California finding that an alleged sexual assault by an employee at a conference could expose the employer to liability.
Granted, the above mentioned developments do not even take into account several relevant happenings at the state level including 55% of voters in the District of Columbia approving Initiative 77 which would raise hourly minimum wage rates in the District...only to have the District of Columbia Council take steps to repeal it, voters in both Missouri and Arkansas approving minimum wage hikes back in November, and of course New Jersey's Governor signing a paid sick leave bill into law as well as the Diane B. Allen Equal Pay Act.
Granted, the above mentioned developments do not even take into account several relevant happenings at the state level including 55% of voters in the District of Columbia approving Initiative 77 which would raise hourly minimum wage rates in the District...only to have the District of Columbia Council take steps to repeal it, voters in both Missouri and Arkansas approving minimum wage hikes back in November, and of course New Jersey's Governor signing a paid sick leave bill into law as well as the Diane B. Allen Equal Pay Act.
With that being said, those developments barely scrape the surface of postings from this past year. I look forward to keeping readers updated further in the coming year.
As always, below are a couple articles that caught my eye this week.
Seattle Mariners Hit With Discrimination & Wrongful Termination Suit
Recently, the Seattle Mariners had a discrimination and wrongful termination lawsuit filed against them by a former high performance director. The former employee claims that several Latino players complained about feeling excluded and that the team's general manager took steps to undermine the progress and mental state of one of the team's star pitchers. Despite the former employee apparently going to team owners and the CEO to make the alleged issues known, nothing was apparently done. At this time, the team responded via its Twitter account and called the claims made in the suit "outrageous" and "false", although no formal answer has been filed as of yet. This will be an interesting case to watch play out, given the high profile nature of the former employer, a Major League Baseball team.
Judge Halts Efforts to Put Initiative 77 Back on Ballot
At the start of the month, D.C. Superior Court Judge Neal E. Kravitz halted efforts to put a new minimum wage referendum on the ballot. As noted above, Initiative 77 has been somewhat of a lightening rod for attention on both sides of the aisle. After Initiative 77 was repealed by the D.C. Council, advocates had collected more than 25,000 signatures in an effort to get the matter before voters again in the spring. However, Judge Kravitz held that elections officials failed to follow proper procedures when they allowed referendum supporters to collect the 25,000 signatures, thus ending any possibility for a new referendum. For the time being, it looks like this is another dead end for minimum wage supporters in the District. Though something tells me this is likely not the last we will hear from them as they continue to find other ways to raise hourly wage rates.
Seattle Mariners Hit With Discrimination & Wrongful Termination Suit
Recently, the Seattle Mariners had a discrimination and wrongful termination lawsuit filed against them by a former high performance director. The former employee claims that several Latino players complained about feeling excluded and that the team's general manager took steps to undermine the progress and mental state of one of the team's star pitchers. Despite the former employee apparently going to team owners and the CEO to make the alleged issues known, nothing was apparently done. At this time, the team responded via its Twitter account and called the claims made in the suit "outrageous" and "false", although no formal answer has been filed as of yet. This will be an interesting case to watch play out, given the high profile nature of the former employer, a Major League Baseball team.
Judge Halts Efforts to Put Initiative 77 Back on Ballot
At the start of the month, D.C. Superior Court Judge Neal E. Kravitz halted efforts to put a new minimum wage referendum on the ballot. As noted above, Initiative 77 has been somewhat of a lightening rod for attention on both sides of the aisle. After Initiative 77 was repealed by the D.C. Council, advocates had collected more than 25,000 signatures in an effort to get the matter before voters again in the spring. However, Judge Kravitz held that elections officials failed to follow proper procedures when they allowed referendum supporters to collect the 25,000 signatures, thus ending any possibility for a new referendum. For the time being, it looks like this is another dead end for minimum wage supporters in the District. Though something tells me this is likely not the last we will hear from them as they continue to find other ways to raise hourly wage rates.
Comments
Post a Comment