State and local governments continue to increase workplace regulations. Although it is not feasible to discuss all laws, this update provides an overview of significant recent and upcoming legislative and regulatory developments to help you and your organization stay in compliance with local and state employment laws.
To view the full alert, visit the Faegre Drinker website.
The 2023 rule, which was set to take effect on March 11, would have expanded the joint employer test to include reserved and indirect control — potentially exposing franchisors to claims that their franchise agreements and brand standards make them joint employers of their franchisee’s employees for purposes of collective bargaining and labor disputes. The federal district court concluded that the 2023 rule is unlawful because it would expand joint employment beyond the outer limits set by the common-law definition of employment. Other courts are likely to weigh in. The NLRB may appeal to the Fifth Circuit. A parallel suit brought by the Service Employees International Union regarding the scope of the 2023 rule is currently pending before the D.C. Circuit. Either or both of those cases may ultimately go to the U.S. Supreme Court. We conclude with two relevant handouts that identify franchisors’ best practices.
To view the full alert, visit the Faegre Drinker website.
As we witnessed in the first, second and third quarters of 2023, state and local governments continued to increase workplace regulations in the fourth quarter of the year. Read our update for an overview of recent and upcoming legislative developments to help you and your organization stay in compliance.
Continue reading “State & Local Employment Law Developments: Q4 2023”
The U.S. Supreme Court will decide in Murray v. UBS Securities, LLC whether a whistleblower must prove that an employer acted with “retaliatory intent” to be protected under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. The Court’s decision will settle a split between the circuit courts, which will impact how employers defend against Sarbanes-Oxley Act retaliation claims.
The U.S. Supreme Court has granted certiorari in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Mo., No. 22-193, to address a split in the circuit courts over whether a forced lateral transfer, with no change in pay or benefits, is an adverse employment action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Such a finding would further expand the type of conduct that can give rise to a cause of action under Title VII.
To view the full alert, visit the Faegre Drinker website.
Common to the class actions filed this year are allegations that employers requested or required candidates to disclose their family medical histories before receiving employment offers. The plaintiffs’ bar in Illinois may be looking to use the Genetic Information Privacy Act (GIPA) to challenge on a class-wide basis conduct that could only be challenged under the federal Genetic Information Non-Discrimination Act (GINA) on an individual basis.