Despite strong opposition from New Jersey business groups, on February 6, 2023, Gov. Phil Murphy signed the Temporary Workers’ Bill of Rights into law (A1474/S511). This new law places significant burdens upon “temporary help service firms” and their clients. The law requires that temporary workers be paid “not less than the same average rate of pay and equivalent benefits as a permanent employee of a third-party client performing the same or substantially similar work on jobs the performance of which requires equal skill, effort or responsibility, which are performed under the same working conditions.” This “equal-pay-equal-benefit” provision, besides potentially increasing costs, will prove challenging for employers to calculate the cost of equivalent benefits.
On March 3, 2022, President Joe Biden signed the “Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021” (the Act) into law. Upon signing the bill, which had bipartisan Congressional support, President Biden proclaimed, “[w]hen it comes to sexual harassment and assault, forced arbitration shielded perpetrators, silenced survivors, enabled employers to sweep episodes of sexual assault harassment under the rug and it kept survivors from knowing if others have experienced the same thing in the same workplace, at the hands of the same person.”
The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and state wage and hour laws require businesses to record and pay their nonexempt employees for all “compensable time,” including certain activities that occur before an employee begins his or her principal activities during the work day. During the COVID-19 pandemic and after retail employees “return to work,” workers may be required (or choose) to engage in certain tasks at the start of their shifts and throughout the workday.
For the full alert, visit the Faegre Drinker website.
In Robles v. Domino’s Pizza LLC, No. 17-55504 (9th Cir. Jan. 15, 2019), the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a district court’s dismissal of the plaintiff’s ADA claim pursuant to the primary jurisdiction doctrine due to the lack of website accessibility regulations from the Department of Justice. In doing so, the Court issued three important rulings.
First, to the extent there was any doubt, the Court held that the ADA applies to websites of places of public accommodations if there is a sufficient nexus between the website and a physical brick and mortar location. Second, the Court held that applying the ADA to websites does not violate the Fourteenth Amendment right to due process merely because DOJ has not implemented specific regulations setting forth a technical standard for website accessibility. Third, the Court held that the district court erred in dismissing the case under the primary jurisdiction doctrine because DOJ has expressed no interest in promulgating regulations governing website accessibility and, therefore, deferring to the DOJ would delay the resolution of the plaintiff’s claims.
Retailers and other companies have been besieged by lawsuits alleging that their websites are not accessible to visually impaired users in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and similar state laws. Some companies have been sued multiple times by different plaintiffs represented by different lawyers, even though the companies had previously agreed in earlier settlements to ensure that their websites are accessible to the visually impaired.
In a long-awaited decision, the United States Supreme Court, by a 5-to-4 vote, overturned the National Labor Relations Board’s (the “Board”) ruling that class action waivers violate the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) because they interfere with the right to engage in “protected activity,” which, according to the Board, includes the ability to bring class or collective actions. Epic Sys. Corp. v. Lewis, No. 16-0285, 2018 WL 2292444, at *23 (U.S. May 21, 2018).