Delaware is the latest state to mandate that employers provide anti-harassment training to employees. Delaware joins New York, California, Connecticut, and Maine as states that require employers to provide such training. The new law amends the Delaware Discrimination in Employment Act (“DDEA”), and takes effect on January 1, 2019.
While the DDEA already prohibited discrimination based on sex, the recent amendments are devoted to prevention of sexual harassment in the workplace. The new law amends the DDEA to define sexual harassment and provides the same process used for Title VII violations with regard to exhaustion of administrative remedies prior to filing a private lawsuit.
Continue reading “Delaware Joins Growing List of States Passing Anti-Harassment Legislation”
The U.S. Department of Labor (“DOL”) Wage and Hour Division recently announced that its model Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”) notices and certification forms are valid for another three years, until August 31, 2021. There is nothing new in the updated model FMLA forms, other than a new expiration date, which is located on the top right corner of the forms.
Employers who use the DOL’s model FMLA forms can access them at the following links:
Continue reading “U.S. Department of Labor Extends Expiration of FMLA Forms Through August 2021”
At least once a month I receive a postcard in the mail from a local, regional or national realtor about homes sold recently in my neighborhood. These glossy postcards typically feature a specific real estate agent with his or her photo, name and telephone number. What these postcards don’t tell you, however, is whether the agent is subject to a non-compete agreement. Because I’m always looking for interesting topics to discuss related to restrictive covenants, this seventeenth article in The Restricting Covenant series explores realtors, real estate agents and non-compete disputes.
Continue reading “Part 17 of “The Restricting Covenant” Series: Realtors, Real Estate Agents, and Restrictive Covenants”
New Jersey’s comprehensive new equal pay law, the Diane B. Allen Equal Pay Act (the “Act”), took effect last month. The law amends the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (“NJLAD”) by making it a prohibited employment practice for an employer to compensate an employee who is a member of a “protected class” less than the amount paid to employees who are not members of that protected class for “substantially similar work, when viewed as a composite of skill, effort, and responsibility.” Employers can prove a compensation differential is lawful by showing it is due to a seniority system, merit system, or by satisfying several factors including that the differential is based on legitimate, bona fide factors other than the employee’s membership in a protected class, and that the factors supporting the differential are job-related and based on a legitimate business necessity. The Act extends the NJLAD’s two-year statute of limitations to a six-year statute of limitations for wage discrimination claims.
Continue reading “New Jersey Equal Pay Data Reporting Forms Released”
Make no bones about it, non-compete disputes can be litigious, contentious, and downright nasty. Someone breached another’s trust or loyalty; or stole something valuable from someone else; or didn’t uphold his or her end of the bargain. Battle lines are drawn. Nevertheless, there are codes of civility, professionalism, and rules of law that must be followed. So, you would think that when a court enters an order granting injunctive relief consistent with the parties’ non-compete agreement, the order would be followed, right? Read on. In this sixteenth article of the Series, I discuss a few extreme examples of litigants in non-compete disputes who failed to comply with court orders, resulting in significant monetary damages and other sanctions.
Continue reading “Part 16 of “The Restricting Covenant” Series: Civil Contempt and Covenants Not to Compete”
Massachusetts recently joined a growing list of states amending their equal pay legislation. On July 1, 2018, the Act to Establish Pay Equity, originally passed in 2016, took effect, amending Massachusetts’ existing Equal Pay Act.
The law bans pay differentials on the basis of sex where two people perform comparable work, adopting the more liberal “equal pay for comparable work” standard, as opposed to the federal law’s “equal pay for equal work” standard. Comparable work is defined as work that requires substantially similar skill, effort, and responsibility that is performed under similar working conditions. Like other equal pay laws, employers can plead certain affirmative defenses in response to an employee’s claim of pay discrimination, if the employer can show the pay differential is due to:
Continue reading “Massachusetts Equal Pay Act Took Effect July 1, 2018”