- Employers Beware: Most Highly Compensated Employees Still Must Meet the FLSA’s Salary Basis Test to Be Exempt from Overtime Pay
- Sixth Circuit Set to Weigh in on the Current, Burdensome Two-Step Collective Action Standard
- A New Year Brings New Wage and Hour Laws
- More than Just Back-Pay for Unfair Labor Practices – the NLRB Adopts New Make-Whole Relief Model
- When Pennies Become Thousands of Dollars: Are Courts Eroding the De Minimis Rule?
- The Pendulum Swings Again: DOL Proposes “New” Independent Contractor Rule
- California Poised to Join States with Robust Pay Transparency Laws
- Compliance Steps For Cos. After Mich. LGBTQ Bias Ruling
- Department of Labor Proposes New Rule on Nondisplacement of Qualified Workers under Service Contracts
- States Push for Pay Equity and Transparency Laws
- Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)
- Department of Labor (DOL)
- Minimum Wage
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
- Exempt Status
- White Collar & Investigations
- Independent Contractor
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
- Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
- Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)
- Home Health Care
- Attorney Fees
- Interns and Internships
- Nondiscretionary Bonus
- Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA)
- Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- December 2020
- June 2020
- January 2020
- October 2019
- September 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- December 2018
- August 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- June 2017
- February 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- December 2014
- September 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- September 2013
- February 2013
- Posts by Matthew E. RadlerPartner
Matthew Radler is a labor and employment attorney who focuses his practice on wage and hour matters and assists in litigating noncompete, trade secret and employment dispute matters.
- Counsels clients through various stages of ...
Many employers already have personal experience with the costly two-step process for collective overtime or minimum wage claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”). This process permits employees to commence expensive class-type lawsuits against an employer with almost no factual support for their ability to represent other employees. However, this soon may change. The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals is scheduled to review the proper process for certifying FLSA collective actions, and potentially could reduce the significant costs employers now routinely endure when defending themselves in wage and hour litigation. The outcome of Clark v. A&L Home Care and Training Center, LLC could change the course of numerous wage and hour cases in Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky and Tennessee.
On May 21, 2018, the Supreme Court upheld the use of class action waivers in employment arbitration agreements, which is one of the few options employers have to limit costly “bet the business” class actions. Prior to this decision, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and a few appellate courts had held that these waivers were invalid because they conflicted with the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), the federal law governing collective bargaining and other labor union issues. In its recent decision, Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis, the high court rejected that conclusion and reinstated the practice of using class action waivers nationwide. In light of this ruling, employers should consider revising their policies or adopting new arbitration agreements.
The Department of Labor (DOL) surprised many observers by announcing it would issue a new proposed rule on calculating the “regular rate of pay” for determining overtime wages in its recently issued 2018 regulatory agenda. The DOL has only stated that it intends to “clarify, update, and define regular rate requirements” for the Fair Labor Standards Act, and that the proposed rule will be issued in September 2018.
The Department of Labor (DOL) recently issued its first set of opinion letters since 2010, when the Obama administration suspended the practice of issuing such guidance. The return of opinion letters is welcome news for employers. Among other things, obtaining the DOL’s informal opinion on a wage and hour compliance question may help avoid costly disputes and, in certain circumstances, provide affirmative defenses to liability in the event of litigation.
In the wake of multiple federal courts rejecting its previous guidance, the Department of Labor (DOL) has revised its guidelines for determining when an intern may qualify as an “employee” under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA.) Going forward, the DOL will follow the “primary beneficiary” test–a standard endorsed by several appellate courts. This shift may reduce costly investigations and lawsuits, because the “primary beneficiary” factors are viewed as providing more flexibility in structuring unpaid internship programs.
The Sixth Circuit’s recent decision in Stein v. hhgregg, Inc. should be required reading for any employer with a commission workforce.
Today, in a return to pre-Obama era standards, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) announced the withdrawal of two informal guidance letters impacting the “joint employer” doctrine.
A hot topic in 2016 was the implementation of new regulations more than doubling the minimum required salary amount for the executive, administrative and professional exemptions under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). In late November 2016, a federal court in Texas enjoined the rules from taking effect, and in December, President Obama’s administration appealed that ruling.
In a recent opinion, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit broadened the conflict over whether employers may require employees to arbitrate their employment claims individually, instead of through class or collective actions. Specifically, in Lewis v. Epic Systems Corp., issued on May 26, 2016, the Seventh Circuit sided with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and held that collective action waivers violate the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) and cannot be enforced.
The United States Department of Labor’s long-anticipated revisions to the Fair Labor Standards Act’s (FLSA) overtime regulations may become effective sooner than expected. The Department announced on March 14, 2016 that it submitted its final overtime rules to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), part of the Office of Management and Budget. Once OIRA signs off on the final rules, publication could take place as early as April or May. The Department of Labor previously estimated publication would take place in July of 2016.
The minimum wage requirements in different states, cities and counties across the country became even more of a patchwork on New Year’s day, with fourteen states adopting increased minimum wages above the federal standard of $7.25 per hour. Such states include California, Massachusetts, Michigan and Nebraska. More than a dozen cities and counties also increased their minimum wages at the end of 2015 or will do so in the Summer of 2016. Employers should pay close attention to minimum wage increases at the state and local level, because they can impact more than just employees earning the current minimum wage.
Employee claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) for unpaid minimum wages are routinely dismissed where the employer can demonstrate that wages, when averaged across work hours in a week, meet or exceed the minimum wage. However, a federal judge in the District of Rhode Island has given plaintiffs an alternative argument to avoid such dismissal, which employers should note.