In line with recently passed legislation in New York and California, Illinois’ legislature rallied to create a bill that would help increase employee protections by combating discrimination and harassment in the workplace.
With the resumption of the current legislative session on August 12, 2019, the a California Senate Committee briefly considered AB 5, the legislature’s purported solution to the California Supreme Court's opinion in Dynamex v. Superior Court.
On August 9, 2019, the National Labor Relations Board published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking proposing three amendments to its representation election regulations.
On August 8, 2019, the Minneapolis City Council unanimously passed the Wage Theft Prevention Ordinance, creating new requirements for Minneapolis employers and giving the Minneapolis Department of Civil Rights enforcement power.
On August 7, 2019, the Second Circuit handed down the latest decision in a series of cases across the country on a company’s obligation to provide lifetime health care to retirees.
New Jersey recently enacted its Wage Theft Law, transforming the state’s wage and hour laws into one of the most robust in the country. The law substantially expands the civil and criminal recourse available for nonpayment of wages and retaliation.
Recent case law on the distinction between an employee and independent contractor for wrongful dismissal purposes would suggest that even if the court does not find the individual to be an employee, it might nonetheless apply an intermediate status.
Rhode Island has followed the recent trend of its neighboring states—including Maine, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire—by enacting a law that largely prohibits employers from entering into noncompete agreements with their employees.
Podcast topics include the nomination of Eugene “Gene” Scalia to be Secretary of Labor, current leadership in the Department and its regulatory agenda and discussion of several significant rulemakings.
When are noncompetition and nonsolicitation clauses enforceable in Canada? A recent Ontario decision examined these clauses in the context of an employment agreement.
