The Majority Opinion: Legal Blog

  At the end of every year, I traditionally do an overview of some of the key highlights (or perhaps lowlights) on the labor & employment law front around the country over the prior 12 months.  With the coronavirus dominating news coverage since at least early March (and the subsequent impact on workplace issues), I could spend hours going through labor & employment law developments that have arisen because of the virus.  However, rather than rehashing that matter, I think it is more appropriate to turn the page on 2020 and move forward into the new year. As always, below are a couple articles that caught my eye this week. COVID, the Vaccine, & Age Discrimination I intended to focus on a few non-coronavirus related topics this week, but this article is especially timely and worth highlighting at the outset.   The National Law Review recently wrote an insightful article on potential age discrimination issues that may arise for employers as the vaccine rolls out across the c

  Although we are still a few days away from the start of 2021 and while it is early in the ballgame, perhaps there is no time like the present to christen 2021 as the year of minimum wage hikes across the country. Why might 2021 be the year of minimum wage hikes?  Take for instance the fact that 20 states will raise minimum wage rates on January 1st.  Of note, those 20 states do not occupy one part of the country or “traditionally” employee friendly states such as New York, New Jersey, or California.  In fact, on January 1st, Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Montana, South Dakota, Illinois, Florida, and Maine, among others, will raise their hourly pay rates.  There are of course a few notable “outcasts”, such as Texas, which are still holding steady at $7.25/hour (the federal minimum wage rate.)  However, with nearly half the country bumping up minimum wage rates on Friday, the tide is certainly starting to turn in favor of increasing wage rates for employees.  At this point, I do not see t

  Effective Friday, January 1st, the hourly minimum wage rate in Missouri will increase to $10.30/hour. Readers might recall that this minimum wage hike came about after voters approved the measure back in 2018.  This wage hike will apply to all employers in the state except for those retail and service employers whose gross sales are less than $500,000.00.  Based upon the language of Proposition B (the ballot measure), the hourly minimum wage rate will increase $.85/hour each year through 2023. For employers in the state, now is as good of a time as any to start making plans for the 2021 (and 2022 - 2023) wage hikes. For additional information:   https://ozarksindependent.com/2020/12/27/minimum-wage-in-missouri-tops-10-an-hour-friday/

  Rounding out a shorter week, I found a couple articles worth highlighting.  In particular, I call attention to a development at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission which has the potential to dramatically impact how the agency (and its general counsel) litigate matters going forward. As always, below are a couple articles that caught my eye this week. Restaurant Owners, Rising Labor Costs, & Staying Afloat Jaya Saxena at Eater wrote an article recently that took stock among some restaurant owners in regard to how they were managing to pay their employees a living wage while also juggling increasing menu prices (to the chagrin of some customers.)  It should come as no surprise that with many employers increasing pay rates for their employees (whether voluntarily or by local ordinance/statute), that has resulted in increasing prices on the menu to offset the rising labor costs.  I will refer readers to the article for a survey of how some of these employers have implemented

  Last week, the New York City Council approved a bill that would prohibit fast food workers in the city from being fired without a “valid” reason and would these workers to appeal a termination through arbitration. Let us start first with a look at the prohibition on employers terminating fast food workers without a valid reason.  This is particularly troubling, from the viewpoint of an employer, given that New York is an “at will” employment state.  (For those unfamiliar with “at will” employment, an employer may terminate an employee for any reason or no reason, so long as the act of terminating an employee is not illegal or a form of retaliation.)  However, this bill seems to rewrite things by requiring fast food employers to have a “valid” reason for terminating an employee.  This is obviously a deviation from the “at will” standard already in place for the state. Moving to the second part of the bill which would allow these terminated workers to appeal the termination through arb

  Earlier this month, Pittsburgh Mayor Bill Peduto signed a new ordinance that will provide many workers in the city with leave to deal with a coronavirus sickness. The ordinance will supplement The Pittsburgh Paid Sick Days Act (“PDSA”) which took effect earlier this year.  Under the ordinance, covered employees are expressly permitted to use sick time under the PDSA before it is accrued so long as the reason for the leave is related to the coronavirus. Now for the all important specifics of the ordinance.  Employers in the city with more than 50 employees are required to provide paid coronavirus sick time to their employees for coronavirus related reasons such as the care of a family member due to a coronavirus related reason, a determination that an employee’s presence in the workplace could jeopardize the health of others because of the coronavirus, as well as an employee’s need to self isolate because of coronavirus related matters.  (The ordinance applies to employees that are wo

  I think one of the big developments this week was the updated guidance in regard to employers and employees and the coronavirus vaccine.  Many readers have likely seen the news reports this week about the vaccine being released across the country (and world for that matter.)  In the weeks and months ahead, as more of the vaccine is distributed, I suspect the recently released guidance will be a good resource to consult. As always, below are a couple articles that caught my eye this week. Virtual Onboarding in 2021 As we come to the end of 2020, many employers and HR professionals are likely looking ahead to 2021 and what the workplace (and hiring process) will look like.  Even as we round out December, it is a good idea to start coordinating and planning ahead for the coming months.  As this article from HRDive points out, virtual onboarding is likely to continue to be commonplace in the months ahead.  With virtual onboarding comes a change to how employers and HR professionals work

  In a few short weeks, voters in Georgia will head back to the polls to cast their vote in two Senate run off elections between Republican Senator David Perdue and challenger Democrat Jon Ossoff and Republican Senator Kelly Loeffler and Democrat Raphael Warnock. With the outcome of that race determining whether Republicans or Democrats will have majority control of the U.S. Senate, there has been a lot of attention paid to these run off elections.  Of note, Democratic challenger Jon Ossoff made news this past weekend at a campaign event.  In response to a question from an attendee at the event, Ossoff stated that he believed illegal immigrants should be paid the federal minimum wage rate.  In his remarks, Ossoff stated that federal immigration authorities should be in charge of ensuring this federal minimum wage rate is paid to these workers. Ossoff has argued that a large swath of workers in the state’s agriculture sector are comprised of Latino immigrants, some of whom are illegal a

  Effective today, Starbucks is raising its hourly pay rate for 30% of its workforce. According to the company, this is the start of a plan to raise hourly pay rates for its entire workforce to $15/hour without three years.  This move comes on the heels of other large employers, such as Target and Walmart, raising hourly pay rates for its workforce earlier this year.  Will other large employers follow suit?  While nothing is a sure thing, I would expect to see similar stories in the coming months. For additional information:   https://thehill.com/policy/finance/529693-starbucks-to-boost-minimum-wage-above-15-per-hour-at-30-percent-of-its?amp

The end of the year normally means less time on the road and in court and more time to read through articles.  This year, unfortunately is much different with many, many courts holding hearings and trials to close out 2020.  Even with not having any travel, the amount of court appearances has left me with little time to read through articles.  With that being said, I did come across a couple articles worth mentioning. As always, below are a couple articles that caught my eye this week. New York Senate Republicans Push For Delay to Minimum Wage Hike Earlier this week, Senate Republicans in New York began to voice their support for delaying a minimum wage hike in the state, set to take effect at the end of the year.  While it is not expected that Governor Andrew Cuomo would agree to any delay (nor Senate Democrats for that matter), might this effort to delay the minimum wage hike prove effective? OSHA Under Fire For Limited Enforcement At Meat Packing Plants In recent months, the Occupat

  Earlier this week, ten Democratic Senators sent Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) Chair Janet Dhillon a letter asking about the EEOC’s authority to investigate bias in artificial intelligence (“AI”) driven hiring technology. This question over whether AI technology that is used in the hiring process is biased against certain applicants has been an ongoing discussion point for years.  The EEOC is charged with investigating bias in the workplace, per Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  In the letter the Senators have sought information to establish what authority the EEOC possesses to investigate the use of AI in the hiring process.  While this letter really just serves as a “fact finding” mission of sorts, it does keep the discussion going in regard to the use of AI in the hiring process and the potential bias (intentional or unintentional) that can arise. This is one to keep an eye on going forward.

  As we close in on the end of 2020, attention has started to turn toward 2021 and where the nationwide fight for a $15/hour minimum wage rate might lead. Readers will likely recall that a $15/hour minimum wage rate is common in some parts of the country such as New York, New Jersey, and Massachusetts.  While these traditionally liberal leaning states approving a statewide $15/hour minimum wage rate is not necessarily much of a surprise, it is noteworthy that voters in Florida approved a $15/hour statewide minimum wage rate last month.  That has lead many to suggest that if a more “middle of the road” state can approve a $15/hour minimum wage rate, a $15/hour minimum wage rate might be possible in any corner of the country. There are of course a few things that could prevent that from immediately happening and it starts with the coronavirus pandemic.  With many employers struggling to keep the lights on and make ends meet right now, having to juggle rising labor costs is no small chore

  I wanted to give a nod to a recent coronavirus related bonus that Walmart is providing its workers before moving on to a more nuanced look at a key factor that claimants must take into account when filing an age discrimination claim.  Being tied up in trial most of the week did not give me much time to read through articles but these should give readers something interesting to page through over the next few days. As always, below are a couple articles that caught my eye this week. Walmart Announces Coronavirus Related Holiday Bonuses For Hourly Workers Earlier this week, Walmart announced that it would provide its hourly workers with a holiday bonus, due in part to the ongoing coronavirus pandemic.  As Melissa Repko at CNBC noted, full time hourly workers will receive a bonus of $300 while part time hourly workers will receive a bonus of $150.  It is worth noting that Walmart has been providing its employees with several bonuses throughout the year in an effort to provide its worke

  Earlier this week, Google was hit with a complaint filed with the National Labor Relations Board (the “NLRB”) that alleged the company unlawfully spied on employees that were organizing employee protests and then unlawfully terminated two of those employees as a result of their organization efforts. The complaint alleged that one employee, Laurence Berland, was working to organize against Google’s work with IRI Consultants, a business that had previously engaged in anti-union efforts.  Berland was apparently terminated from Google when he was found to have been reviewing other employees’ calendars.  (The NLRB has held that Google’s policy prohibiting employees looking at a coworker’s calendar is unlawful.)  Another employee, Kathryn Spiers, was terminated after she created a pop up for Google employees that visited IRI’s website.  The pop up said “Googlers have the right to participate in protected concerted activities.” At this point, Google has until mid month to file an answer to