The Majority Opinion: Legal Blog

Over the past few years, the emergence of E-Cigarettes in the workplace has become more common.  The question that employers now face is how to handle employees that want to "vape" while at work.  Employees often argue that since E-Cigarettes are not technically "cigarettes" per se, they should be allowed to use them at work.  Other employees, often ones that do not use E-Cigarettes, complain that they should not be subjected to the E-Cigarettes, regardless of whether or not they are not as harmful as regular cigarettes.  The question then becomes how does a company deal with the use of E-Cigarettes?  However, not all companies agree on whether or not to allow their employees to use these E-Cigarettes:  Exxon Mobile and McDonalds allow it, while CVS, Starbucks, and Wal-Mart all prohibit their employees from vaping. While many states ban smoking in the workplace, only three states (New Jersey, North Dakota, and Utah) have added E-...

Francine Katz, a former executive at Anheuser-Busch, brought suit in 2009 and alleged that she was sexually discriminated against by the company.  Katz claimed that she was paid significantly less than her male counterpart who held the position before her.  After being promoted to vice president of communication and consumer affairs, Katz earned approximately $1 million annually.  However, she claimed that her male counterpart who held the position before her earned around $5 million annually.  Katz further alleged that she was not invited to meetings with company executives, was excluded from golf outings, and on occasion, was not invited to fly on the company's jet with other executives.  In essence, Katz attempted to show that the "good 'ol boy" network excluded her based solely upon her being female. Anheuser-Busch argued that Katz's compensation compared favorably to other executives in similar positions at other companies and that Katz's predecess...

I hope all the readers of the blog are having a good Memorial Day.  I'm taking the day off but still wanted to post this update on new laws in California to tide the readers over until I post additional updates later this week.  Enjoy! Each state has a host of new employment and labor related laws that take effect in 2014.  This series focuses on several new laws from around the country that are of particular interest. AB 10 raises California's minimum wage to $9.00 per hour on July 1, 2014 and again to $10.00 per hour on January 1, 2016.  Note that the current minimum wage in California is $8.00 per hour.  With the increased discussion of minimum wages across the country (and President Obama's recent executive order on the issue), there is likely to be continued movement on this issue in the coming years. AB 442 amended California Labor Code Sections 1194.2 and 1197.1 that now authorizes the Labor Commissioner to seek payment of liquidated dam...

Employers Should Reevaluate Their Intern Programs This is a helpful reminder for employers to reevaluate their intern programs to ensure that there are not any potential legal issues that could arise over the interns claiming they are actually employees and are therefore entitled to compensation.  The article provides a few points that employers should review in order to ensure they are in compliance with unpaid internship laws.   Should Employers Monitor the Social Media Posts of Its Employees? This Wall Street Journal article has a mini debate over whether employers should monitor the social media posts of its employees.  Given the increasing number of employees who use FaceBook, Twitter, Instagram, Snapchat, Pinterest, etc., concerns can arise over what these employees are actually posting.  Employer likely have a reason to be concerned about what the employees are posting, especially if it could impact the company's reputation, finances, etc....

Another month, another lawsuit filed by an N.F.L. cheerleader complaining of violations of minimum wage laws by N.F.L. teams.   It all started with a Raiders cheerleader in January who filed suit complaining that she was paid around $5 an hour for her work during the season, well below minimum wage ( Oakland Raiders Cheerleader Lawsuit ).  Inspired by the Raiders lawsuit, a Cincinnati Bengals cheerleader filed a similar suit in early February complaining of wage and hour violations by the team on the grounds that the cheerleaders were only paid $2.85 an hour ( Cincinnati Bengals Cheerleader Lawsuit ).  In March, a lawsuit was filed by former members of the Buffalo Bills cheerleading group, complaining of wage and hour violations by the team ( Buffalo Bills Cheerleader Lawsuit ).  Not to be outdone, a New York Jets cheerleader filed suit against the team at the start of this month and complained that she was only paid about $3.77 an hour ( New York Jets Ch...

The governor of Minnesota recently signed a bill called the Women's Economic Security Act which has greatly expanded protections for women in the workplace.  While the bill is quite expansive, a few points of the bill really stand out: Expands unpaid leave under the Minnesota Parental Leave Act from 6 weeks to 12 weeks; Prevents employers from discriminating against pregnant women and women who have children, in regard to hiring, firing, promotion, or compensation decisions; Require employers with more than 21 employees to provide reasonable accommodations for pregnant employees; and Businesses with large contracts with the state must certify that they pay men and women equal pay for similar jobs. Given the increased litigation that has been brought recently as to pregnant women and women in the workforce, this bill should come as no surprise.  Employers need to be sure that they keep up with the new legislation and additional protections that have been carved out...

As readers of the blog are familiar with, a wage and hour lawsuit was brought against the Oakland Raiders earlier this year on the grounds that the cheerleaders were not paid at least minimum wage for their work done as part of the cheerleading team.  ( Oakland Raiders Cheerleader - Blog ).   The Raiders responded to the suit and asserted, in part, that the claim could not be litigated in the courts and instead should be sent to arbitration.  The Raiders pointed to the terms of the contract that the cheerleaders signed which stated that any dispute that arose in regard to the agreement would be sent to binding arbitration, with the N.F.L. Commissioner to serve as the sole arbitrator.  ( Oakland Raiders Cheerleader Contract - page 29 addressed the arbitration provision).   Last week, the Raiders filed a Motion to Compel Arbitration of this case.  If the court grants the Motion, it would remove this case from the public eye and allow Rog...