Cool image, huh? I drawed it myself. The fact that I took the time to do that suggests that I am in no condition to blog intelligently. Plus, Pandora is on the fritz, so I am all sorts of pissy. Therefore, before I turn out the lights and lock the door at the office, how about some Slipknot -- anger issues, Eric? -- and "That's what he said" after the jump...
That's right folks. It's time for another edition of "Fact or Fiction" a/k/a "Quick Answers to Quick Questions" a/k/a QATQQ f/k/a "I don't feel like writing a long blog post" d/b/a (just for today) "Eric's 36th-Birthday Post".
*** Sigh ***
Ahh...let's get to today's question:
May an employee raise claims in federal court against an employer under both the Fair Labor Standards Act (federal) and a state wage and hour law? Or is the latter preempted by the former, such that an employee may only pursue FLSA claims?
The answer to today's question -- at least in the Third Circuit Court of Appeals -- comes to us from a decision rendered Tuesday in Knepper v. Rite Aid Corp. There, the court recognized that the FLSA "evinces a clear intent to preserve rather than supplant state law." Consequently, it held that state wage and hour laws such as the Maryland Wage and Hour Law and the Ohio Minimum Fair Wage Standards Act -- two laws that track the federal overtime requirements -- are not preempted by the FLSA.
We also dipped into some hot issues, the hottest of which, by far, based on audience engagement, was unpaid internships. Oh boy, is it easy for companies to potentially screw up unpaid internships. Just ask Charlie Rose and Harper's Bazaar.
Want to get 'em right without running afoul of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Six steps to success follow after the jump...
As the year draws to a close, let's take a look back at the most popular posts at The Employer Handbook in 2011, based on number of hits:
5. Social media and the workplace. School teacher Natalie Munroe made several appearances on the blog this year. Remember her? She was the blogging school teacher who wrote that her students were "utterly loathsome in all imaginable ways." Although, Ms. Munroe eventually returned to work, her experience is a sound reminder to always think twice before hitting "send." You can read the fifth-most-popular post, "Yes, you CAN discipline employees who abuse social media" here.
4. I'm a poet and I don't even know it. I'm not sure what inspired the fourth-most-popular post. It must have been a slow news day. How else do I come up with the idea to Haiku -- verbing a noun, sorry -- about recent employment-law decisions from the U.S. Supreme Court?
3. FMLA remains a hot issue.This one surprised me. The third-most-popular post is about FMLA legislation in Pennsylvania that never passed.
2. Short and sweet. The second-most-popular post was one of my shortest. I merely announced that the EEOC had finalized its ADAAA regulations. (Note to self: keep it short)
1. Yeah, I know, you only clicked "by accident." This was a runaway. Not even close. To put things in perspective, nearly 4% of all page views at The Employer Handbook were on this one story. Not to come off as too vain -- I'm sure I've done that already in my other stellar posts -- but nearly four times as many viewers checked out the number-one post than my blog biography. What else can I say? In the end, sex sells. (Note to self: keep it sexy).
Thank you to everyone who made The Employer Handbook such a success in its first year. We'll be back on January 3, 2012, the official one-year anniversary of the blog, with something short and sexy employment-law related. But possibly short and sexy.
That was the question that the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals faced in an opinion released yesterday. I'll provide the answer and some analysis after the jump...
What is a blog carnival? It is a collection of links on a particular topic -- here, employment law -- that bloggers have submitted to me, which I then arrange around a particular theme.
For this edition of the Carnival, it's DJ-ESkeelz on the one and two, with a music-themed employment-law blog carnival. I've got 13 hot joints (read: 13 links to employment-law articles from some of the blogosphere's best...)
If Cochese and Bobby, "The Rookie" were working mall security in Pennsylvania, would their employer have to pay them for the time they spend keeping those uniforms looking 80s-spiffy? If it were up to one Pennsylvania federal court, they would be SOL.
Yesterday, I presented "Reducing the Risk of Wage and Hour Litigation" with my partner, 
That was the question that the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals faced in an opinion released yesterday. I'll provide the answer and some analysis after the jump...
