The Majority Opinion: Legal Blog

I came across several great articles this week, but I have had to keep this post shorter given the limited time I have had to post an update this week.  With that being said, the article that has an update on Wisconsin's Right to Work law is well worth a read.   As always, below are a couple articles that caught my eye this week. Federal Judge Throws Out Challenge to Wisconsin's Right to Work Law Recently, U.S. District Court Judge J.P. Stadtmueller threw out a case filed by labor unions which sought to challenge Wisconsin's Right to Work law on the grounds that it violated the National Labor Relations Act.  As David Schuyler over at The Milwaukee Business Journal writes, Judge Stadtmueller cited a case from the Seventh Circuit which upheld Indiana's Right to Work law as support for his ruling.  To the surprise of probably no one, the unions have indicated they will appeal the ruling.  As always, stay tuned.   U.S. Lags in the Area of Paid P...

As with many employment and labor law related cases (and bills) being litigated around the country, there are always a few that stand out.  This is one to keep an eye on. Similar to the minimum wage fight in Arizona (and Washington & Maine), there is a pending minimum wage ballot measure that will go before voters this November.  If approved, Amendment 70 would raise the minimum wage rate in the state from $8.31/hour to $12/hour by 2020.  Last week, U.S. Labor Secretary Tom Perez voiced his support for Amendment 70 and indicated that the Obama administration backed the ballot measure as well.  Given that Colorado is a swing state this election cycle (well, depending who you ask) and tends to be a more liberal state, I think this ballot measure stands a good shot of becoming law.  With that being said, one of the holdup a could be the fact that this is a 'flat' increase to $12/hour across the state.  While Oregon implemented different minimu...

As with many employment and labor law related cases being litigated around the country, there are always a few that stand out.  This is one to keep an eye on. Facts :  The National Labor Relations Board ("NLRB") issued a decision in 2014 in this case that employment contracts which banned class action lawsuits and required employees to arbitrate employment disputes on an individual basis violated the National Labor Relations Act. The Main Issue :  Are employment contracts that require workers to arbitrate disputes individually, and constitute class action waivers, valid under federal labor laws? Current Status :  A petition for certiorari was filed with the United States Supreme Court by the NLRB and the Justice Department. Looking Ahead :  I think it is likely that the Supreme Court will consider this issue as two prior cert petitions were recently filed by employers (Epic Systems and Ernst & Young) that also dealt with class action waivers....

A few weeks ago, the NLRB made a major ruling when it decided that graduate students at private universities can unionize .  To many, this was a landmark decision that again overturned prior NLRB rulings.  Even though the dust has not settled yet, I think this is a good time to highlight a few articles which touch on that NLRB ruling. As always, below are a couple articles that caught my eye this week. A Closer Look at the Board's Ruling and Resulting Impact Natasha Baker over at Inside Higher Ed has one of the more well thought out examinations of the Board's ruling and what the possible impact might be.  Tracking the Board's decision and analysis, Baker does a good job tracking prior decisions that ultimately led to this one.  It goes without saying that Baker took it one step further and offered a look at what the possible impact this decision could have going forward.  I would consider this a good supplement to those who want to read more than ju...

Although I had already posted an article earlier this morning, this breaking development out of Texas is too important to not write about immediately. Earlier today, two lawsuits were filed to challenge the new overtime rules.  The first suit was brought by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.  The second was brought by several business groups and officials from 21 states.  Both suits were filed in federal court in the Eastern District of Texas to challenge the Department of Labor's new overtime rules set to take effect December 1 .  (The 21 states include Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, and Wisconsin).  For those needing a refresher, under the new overtime rules, employers would be required to pay overtime to any salaried worker that earns less than $47,500/year.  (Note, that threshold is double the curre...

Minimum wage issues have continued to develop around the country over the past few months.  Some cities and states such as California and New York have taken steps to raise the minimum wage rates, while others, such as New Jersey and Minneapolis have declined to raise wage rates.  Recently, there has been some movement on the issue in Arizona.  As a result, I think it is important to highlight a few key points in regard to this fight to increase the minimum wage rate in the state: Judge Tosses Challenge to Minimum Wage Ballot Measure :  A few weeks ago, Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Joshua Roberts threw out a case that sought to challenge the signatures gathered that would put a minimum wage ballot measure before voters in November.  In doing so, this now paves the way for voters in the state to decide in November whether to raise minimum wage rates to $12/hour by 2020 (the current minimum wage rate is $8.05/hour). Minimum Wage Issue Could Im...

A few days ago, Republican Presidential candidate, Donald Trump, introduced a plan that would provide for paid maternity leave for workers in the country.  Under Trump's plan, new mothers would be guaranteed six weeks of paid maternity leave (although new fathers would not be guaranteed the same right) which would be paid for via existing unemployment insurance. As others have noted, Trump's proposal breaks from traditional conservative politicians on the issue but still falls short of Democratic candidate, Hillary Clinton.  Under Clinton's proposal, twelve weeks of parental (yes, for both mothers and fathers) would be provided and paid for via taxes on the wealthy.  Regardless of who wins in November, it will be interesting to see if any form of either proposal actually becomes law. For additional information:   http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-donald-trump-child-care-policy-20160913-story.html