Laborsphere

Australia Set to Join Growing List of Countries Recognizing “Right to Disconnect” From the Workplace

The Law

Under amendments to the Fair Work Act 2009, employees in Australia are being given a new “right to disconnect” from the workplace outside of normal working hours. Under the new law, employees may refuse contact, including refusing to monitor, read or respond to contact from the employer or a third party outside of working hours unless the refusal would be “unreasonable.”

While “contact” is not defined in the legislation, it is likely to include any form of contact including email, text or social media messages (e.g., WhatsApp) and phone calls.

The law contains a nonexhaustive list of factors that should be considered when determining whether an employee’s refusal is “unreasonable,” including:

The reason for the contact
Whether the employee is compensated or paid extra for being available to be contacted to perform work within a specific period or working additional hours outside of their ordinary working hours
The nature of the employee’s role and level of his or her responsibility
The employee’s personal situation such as family or caring responsibilities

Continue reading “Australia Set to Join Growing List of Countries Recognizing “Right to Disconnect” From the Workplace”

Michigan Supreme Court Reinstates Voter-Initiated Sick Leave Law

The Michigan Supreme Court’s re-institution of the Earned Sick Time Act (ESTA) significantly expands Michigan’s sick leave requirements. Effective February 21, 2025, Michigan employers not previously covered by the Paid Medical Leave Act (PMLA) should implement a sick leave policy in accordance with the ESTA, and employers who currently follow the PMLA should review their policies and revise them to comply with the ESTA. The supreme court also reinstated the accelerated adoption of a $12 minimum wage in Michigan initiated by voters through the Improved Workforce Opportunity Wage Act.

To view the full alert, visit the Faegre Drinker website.

2024 Labor & Employment Updates for Insurers

We provide insurers five key takeaways from recent employment caselaw and regulation, on topics including the possible banning of noncompete agreements, federal and state minimum salary increases for exempt employees, upcoming audits of federal contractors, the NLRB’s questioned ability to obtain injunctions from federal district courts, and a list of the most significant state legislative and regulatory developments in the first half of 2024.

To view the full alert, visit the Faegre Drinker website.

Health Care Practitioner Noncompete Ban Signed Into Pennsylvania Law

On July 17, 2024, Gov. Josh Shapiro signed the Fair Contracting for Health Care Practitioners Act into Pennsylvania law. The Act prohibits the enforcement of certain noncompete covenants entered into after January 1, 2025, by health care practitioners and their employers, subject to limited, but important, exceptions. Therefore, Pennsylvania health care employers should review their employment agreements and revise them to ensure compliance.

To view the full alert, visit the Faegre Drinker website.

NLRB Withdraws Appeal of Joint Employer Rule Decision

Now that the NLRB has withdrawn its bid to keep the 2023 rule alive, what does this mean for employers? Likely, the NLRB is already looking at alternative methods to implement a similar standard either through new rule making or adjudications. In the interim, the standard now reverts to the 2020 rule, which requires an entity to actually exercise direct and immediate control over the terms and conditions of employment for a group of employees in order to be considered a joint employer.

To view the full alert, visit the Faegre Drinker website.

Trade Secret Remedies After Motorola Solutions, Inc. v. Hytera Communications Corp. Ltd.

In Motorola, the Seventh Circuit provided useful direction on navigating complex remedies issues in trade secret cases. In light of this decision, the plaintiff in trade secret cases should consider preserving conflicting damages models through trial to allow for the recovery of the largest award. Likewise, a trade secret plaintiff should consider utilizing the burden-shifting approach to recover unjust enrichment sales. The trade secret plaintiff can also rely — at least in circumstances like those in Motorola — on unjust enrichment damages to calculate exemplary damages. In addition, the court can consider a defendant’s litigation conduct in deciding the scope of the injunctive relief ordered.

To view the full alert, visit the Faegre Drinker website.