Our tradition includes using our first January post to make predictions about “what’s to come” in the year ahead. But first, let’s see how I did over the last year. “Time for 2019 Manufacturing Law Predictions: Drum Roll Please!” (Jan. 9, 2019). I boldly predicted that on the federal level the government would continue to … Continue Reading
The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation released its Fiscal Year 2019 Annual Report and, you guessed it, it was “un-good” (a legal term I think). The Multiemployer Insurance Program recorded a record-breaking deficit of $65.2 billion. The PBGC warned that the Multiemployer fund will likely be insolvent by 2025, within 6 years from today. Without the … Continue Reading
A few months back, I posted some thoughts about recent efforts to legalize medical and recreational marijuana, with an emphasis on the potential issues such laws would have on manufacturers – particularly manufacturers in a space requiring a heightened concern for employee safety. See “Legal Pot = Manufacturing Storm Clouds” (May 29, 2019). To my … Continue Reading
I have posted a few times here about using post-employment restrictions to preserve a manufacturer’s competitive advantage. See “Non-Compete Cautionary Tale” (Nov, 2, 2018); “I’m New – And It’s No [Trade] Secret” (Oct. 27, 2014) and “Even More Reason for Manufacturers to Update Their Employment Agreements” (June 15, 2015). Many of my clients use these … Continue Reading
[With apologies to the great Yogi Berra!] Over the last three years, I have spent a good bit of space on this blog keeping manufacturers informed of the Department of Labor’s efforts to raise the wages of lower and middle level managerial employees and supervisors by raising the “salary threshold”. See Blog posts of March … Continue Reading
This blog post is dedicated to those of you who took a heathy summer break and want to catch up on the summer’s major developments. Let the speed reading begin! As predicted here, the Trump Administration launched a series of not-so-surprising raids to arrest undocumented workers. As of this writing, there has not been a … Continue Reading
I have just returned from my summer sojourn in the wilds of New England catching up on rest, relaxation and reported court decisions. (Yes, I embrace my inner nerd!) Two recent court decisions dealing with mandatory arbitration agreements caught my eye and highlight why some manufacturers may gain by requiring pre-dispute employment arbitration agreements. In … Continue Reading
Concluding their 2019 legislative sessions, New York and Connecticut adopted sweeping new discrimination and harassment requirements — mandating additional training, expanding available remedies and making it easier for victims to obtain judicial relief. New York In June, the New York General Assembly adopted several significant changes to New York State’s anti-discrimination statute (known as the … Continue Reading
New York City’s recent ban on pre-employment marijuana testing, coupled with recent decisions in New Jersey and Connecticut, could give manufacturers cause for concern. Effective May 20, 2020, New York City employers will no longer be allowed to require pre-employment marijuana testing for most jobs, testing which historically has been a routine part of the … Continue Reading
Key Dates: May 31, 2019 and September 30, 2019 You may have been following the complex twists and turns involving the collection of employee pay and demographic data by the EEOC. While the landscape seems to be constantly changing, pending a stay of the court order in National Women’s Law Center, et al., v. Office … Continue Reading
With the Trump Administration now in its 27th month (half-way through the first term), Federal agencies seem to be picking up the pace of fundamentally altering the legal landscape in which manufacturers operate. Keeping up with these changes can be a full time job. In this blog post, I will highlight some of the more … Continue Reading
Manufacturers and those in the supply chain may have been watching as the federal courts and the National Labor Relations Board struggle to make sense out of widely different views of the “joint employer” standard. Whatever result is ultimately reached will carry significant implications for manufacturers. At stake? When can a manufacturer be required … Continue Reading
This week’s post is somewhat breathless because so much happened or is about to happen. You may have thought the government has been closed for the past 35 days. But just like great magicians who get you to watch their right hand while their left hand is going about the business of the trick, the … Continue Reading
When it comes to 2019 employment and labor developments for manufacturers, I predict …. much more of the same. The election of President Trump and a Republican controlled House and Senate in November 2016 brought a roll-back back from the aggressive enforcement policies of the Obama administration. Simply speaking, the Federal Government has limited or … Continue Reading
Last month, I posted about New York State’s recently enacted law mandating all New York State employers adopt Sexual Harassment Policies and train all employees annually. See “Time to Catch the “Train” – The New York Gender-Based Harassment Train.” The Department of Labor published for public comment its August 23, 2018 draft sexual harassment training … Continue Reading
Continuing its aggressive measures to combat workplace sexual harassment, on August 23, the New York State Department of Labor issued for public comment a draft sexual harassment training program, a checklist of minimum standards for compliant sexual-harassment policies, and a list of FAQs. The materials can be found here. In addition, the New York City … Continue Reading
James Madison groupies rejoice! All others can share my confusion. Called the “Father of the Constitution,” scholars credit Mr. Madison for his significant role in the fundamental design of the United States Constitution, where power was distributed between the states and the federal government, and power within the federal government was distributed among three … Continue Reading
Regular readers know that a good part of my practice deals with the use of “post-employment restrictions” to prevent former employees from using, selling or distributing a company’s most valuable assets – its intellectual property. In one of my first blog posts on this site, I commented that the “explosion” of litigation in this area … Continue Reading
National Labor Relations Board General Counsel Peter Robb issued a June 6 memorandum outlining his views on the legality or illegality of handbook rules in light of recent Trump NLRB decisions. That guidance, which can be found here, gives an overview of Robb’s interpretation of the law. Robb’s guidance represents a radical shift away from … Continue Reading
Manufacturers in Alaska, Arizona, California, Connecticut, Hawaii and Vermont face new limits on the use of an employee’s salary history. The state legislatures in Connecticut and Vermont have both adopted laws banning manufacturers from asking about an applicant’s prior salary. Those laws are expected to be signed by the Governors of those states and will … Continue Reading
The New York State Legislature and New York City Council adopted broad new requirements to combat workplace gender-based harassment. New York State’s new obligations were signed into law on April 12 and take effect at different times over the next 180 days. New York City’s new requirements take effect on April 1, 2019. New York … Continue Reading
Winston Churchill allegedly once said, “lovers of sausage and public policy should not watch either be made.” Recent events at the National Labor Relations Board call that apt quote to mind. In its zeal to overturn Obama-era precedent, the Trump N.L.R.B. seems to have stepped right into it – creating confusion and uncertainty for manufacturers … Continue Reading
Two recent developments, generated from the tidal forces of the #MeToo movement should get manufacturers’ attention. On December 22, 2017, Congress adopted a comprehensive tax reform law. Included in the statute is an amended Section 162(q). That provision states that manufacturers may no longer deduct from federal income tax “(1) any settlement or payment related … Continue Reading
As has been our tradition, January is the time to predict the big developments in the coming year that will impact manufacturers. In January 2017, notwithstanding my “Lawyer’s Shrug,” I predicted Congress was unlikely to raise the minimum wage, but states and cities would attempt to do so; the National Labor Relations Board would turn … Continue Reading
