Employees who resign from work, sue their employer, and assert “constructive discharge” shoulder a heavy burden to demonstrate that they had no choice but to resign. A recent decision of the Massachusetts Appeals Court, Armato v. Town of Stoneham, shows just how heavy that burden is.
The Biden Administration continues to increase administrative agency enforcement initiatives.
In a recent press release, the United States Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division (“WHD”) announced that it now offers new resources “to help combat employer retaliation against workers who exercise their legal rights.” One of those resources is a Field Assistance Bulletin on “Protecting Workers from Retaliation” (“Bulletin”).
As featured in #WorkforceWednesday: This week, we’re breaking down recent local- and state-level developments impacting compliance for employers.
Since 2019, the Illinois Lodging Services Human Trafficking Recognition Training Act (820 ILCS 95/, “the Act”) has required Illinois lodging establishments (such as hotels, motels, and casino hotels) to provide employees with training on how to recognize human trafficking and protocols for reporting suspected human trafficking to authorities. Recent amendments, which became effective January 1, 2022, have ostensibly expanded the scope of covered employers to include other businesses that serve transient populations: restaurants and truck stops.
On April 28, 2022, the New York City Council (the “Council”) approved an amendment to a recently enacted pay transparency law, 2022 Local Law 32 (the “Law”) by an overwhelming majority. The Law will require employers to disclose salary ranges in advertisements for jobs that are performed, at least in part, in New York City, and was set to become effective on May 15, 2022. After significant pushback from the business community, the Council introduced a new bill, Int. No. 134-A (the “Amendment”), to offer additional clarity and time for employers to comply. The Amendment is expected to be signed into law by Mayor Eric Adams. Of greatest immediate significance, once signed, the Amendment delays the effective date of the Law from May 15 to November 1, 2022.
The Amendment clarifies that advertisements for any job, promotion or transfer opportunity will have to include a statement of either a minimum and maximum annual salary or the minimum and maximum hourly wage. The Law will apply to advertisements seeking both exempt employees who earn a salary, and non-exempt employees, who may be paid on a salary or hourly basis.
As featured in #WorkforceWednesday: This week, we look at the increase in mental health discrimination charges the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) recently reported and how employers can respond.
As COVID-19 restrictions have continued to loosen or be lifted altogether, employees have gradually resumed working in the office—and traveling away from it for work-related reasons. When it comes to travel time in the employment context, the answer to the question, “Do I need to pay for that?” often has no straightforward answer. Rather, under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) and U.S. Department of Labor (“DOL”) regulations, whether time an employee spends traveling is compensable depends on the type of travel. In this month’s Time Is Money segment, we provide a refresher on when and how employers must pay employees for travel time.
A California Superior Court judge has invalidated state legislation that required boards of publicly held corporations headquartered in California to include a minimum number of directors from underrepresented communities. The court’s decision effectively strikes down Assembly Bill No. 979 (“AB 979”), a law enacted with the goal of increasing diversity on boards of directors, paving the way for a parallel outcome to a similar challenge of a statutory mandate for increased gender diversity on boards of directors.
Promotion of “Underrepresented Communities” Struck Down
As featured in #WorkforceWednesday: This week, we update you on two major developments from the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB” or “Board”) and this year’s abridged timeline to submit EEO-1 data.
Recent Updates
- New Massachusetts Employer Notice Obligation
- Watch: Change Is Coming from the EEOC—but When? - Employment Law This Week
- The EEOC Moves to End EEO Reporting – Comments Invited Through August 24
- Watch: New York Employers Face New Restrictions on Severance, Tuition Repayment, and Sick Time - Employment Law This Week
- Attention Connecticut Warehouse Employers: Deadline for New Quota Notices Approaching