During a pandemic, protests, and a polarized election season, employers have walked an ever-increasingly fine line between protecting employee speech in the workplace and enforcing rules on workplace conduct.
What is an employer to do when an employee refuses to wear a face covering? What can an operator of a place of public accommodation do when a guest ignores the sign mandating face coverings?
On July 2, 2020, the Supreme Court declined to review the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Rizo v. Yovino. The question for review whether prior salary is a “factor other than sex” that can justify a pay disparity under the federal Equal Pay Act.
Despite best intentions, employers may be unknowingly setting themselves up for future lawsuits by improperly broadening diversity and inclusion initiatives.
The federal government recently released its unified federal regulatory agenda–the document that outlines regulatory and deregulatory actions agencies expect to take in coming months. Issues involving labor and employment featured prominently on the list.
San Francisco has enacted an emergency ordinance that requires certain employers to provide written notice when layoffs occur, grants reemployment rights, and prohibits discrimination against employees who experience a family care hardship.
This article addresses several pieces of legislation enacted by the Commonwealth’s Democratic “trifecta” that employers should have on their near-term radar screen.
On June 24, 2020, the federal government published regulations that federally-regulated employers must follow to investigate, record, report, prevent and provide training with respect to work place harassment and violence, including sexual harassment.
