California law currently requires employers with 50 or more employees to provide at least two hours of prescribed training and education regarding sexual harassment, abusive conduct, and harassment based upon gender to all supervisory employees within six months of assuming a supervisory position and once every two years thereafter.
In California, a court is prohibited from entering an order in a civil action that restricts disclosing this information and such a provision entered into on or after January 1, 2017, void as a matter of law and against public policy. Senate Bill 820 expands this prohibition.
In September 2018, in Northern Kentucky Area Development District v. Danielle Snyder, the Kentucky Supreme Court held that employers are not permitted to require employees to enter into an arbitration agreement as a condition of employment.
Last year, in Doe v. University of Cincinnati, 872 F.3d 393 (6th Cir. 2017), the Sixth Circuit held that, when credibility is at issue, the Due Process Clause requires a public university to provide an accused student a hearing with an opportunity to conduct cross-examination.
Under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), employees who are covered by the act’s overtime provisions must receive overtime pay for hours worked over 40 in a workweek at a rate of not less than time and one-half their regular rate of pay.
The federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) sets forth requirements for employers who obtain criminal background checks (consumer reports in FCRA parlance) on applicants or employees from third parties (referred to as consumer reporting agencies).
In August 2018, in Gaffers v. Kelly Services, Inc., the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld an arbitration agreement that required individual arbitration of claims under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).
Delaware’s Discrimination in Employment Act was amended to address sexual harassment and to require training of employees and supervisors concerning sexual harassment and retaliation. The law takes effect on January 1, 2019.
The New York City Human Rights Law (HRL) prohibits discrimination on the basis of age, citizenship, arrest or conviction record, caregiver status, color, credit history, disability, gender, gender identity, marital status, national origin, pregnancy, race, religion, salary history, sexual orientation, domestic violence victim status, unemployment status, or veteran or military status.
After nearly a decade of work, On August 1, 2018, the Massachusetts Legislature enacted a far-reaching law that imposes substantive and procedural requirements for noncompetition agreements and prohibits their use for several classes of employees (notably, employees who are classified as non-exempt).
On August 17, 2018, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) published Private Letter Ruling 201833012, which directly addressed an employer’s ability to provide a student loan repayment benefit in its 401(k) plan.
We previously wrote about the changes to 162(m) under the “Tax Cuts and Jobs Act” which significantly expanded the $1,000,000 deduction cap on compensation paid by publicly traded companies to certain executive officers.
California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act prohibits harassment and discrimination based on race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, sexual orientation and military and/or veteran status.