Last month, the Supreme Court handed down – if not the most important – certainly, the highest-profile decision of this term with Wal-Mart v. Dukes. However, in addition to this headline-grabber, this term saw four other significant employment-law decisions from the High Court about which employers must take note.
After the jump, I revisit each case…in haiku.
* * *
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.
You’ll see what I mean once you hit the jump…
The U.S. Department of Labor has created apps to allow non-exempt employees to record their time on their iPhones and iPads.
For more on this app and how it may impact companies with hourly employees, read on past the jump.
In an unpublished opinion, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals denied a Pennsylvania company’s attempt to enjoin a former employee, who had entered into several restrictive covenants with the company, to compete directly against the company and solicit its customers.
What did this employer do wrong and how can you learn from its mistakes?
After the jump…
Thomson Reuters had such a bad week last week that I had to spread the news over two blog posts. Here is part one about how the National Labor Relations Board is set to file a complaint against Thomson Reuters for allegedly disciplining an employee who tweeted about labor/management relations.
After the jump, see how bloggers unite to try to stick it to the man for allegedly requiring them to work through their lunch hour without paying overtime…
Earlier this week, I posted a link to the new Fair Labor Standards Act final regulations.
After the jump, I have 15 more resources to help employers navigate the treacherous world of overtime, minimum wage, independent contractor vs. employee, what the FLSA requires, what the FLSA doesn’t require, and other wage and hour speedbumps.
Over the weekend, I gave a Wage and Hour presentation in Atlantic City to a group of restaurant owners. Later this week, I will post some of the bullet points from that presentation of which every business should take note.
Until then, a heads-up that the United States Department of Labor has issued a final rule updating the regulations issued under the Fair Labor Standards Act. You can find a copy of the final rule here.
Two Philadelphia posts in a single week. That’s called keeping it real.
For local employers, keeping it real may mean moving out of the city, as the cost of doing business in Philadelphia could be on the rise.
Check out this post I did for The Legal Intelligencer about a bill that City Council is currently considering that would require businesses to provide paid sick leave to employees who work a minimum number of hours in Philadelphia County.
In a 6-2 decision, the Supreme Court held yesterday that a company may not retaliate against an employee who orally “filed a complaint” about perceived Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) violations.
After the jump, I’ll break down this decision, just what it means to orally file a complaint, and the impact yesterday’s decision will have on employers.
Last month, the United States Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division issued a request for public comments on its preliminary interpretations of a new provision of the Fair Labor Standards Act that requires employers to provide nursing mothers with reasonable break time and a private space for expressing breast milk while at work.
For more information about this new requirement for employers, check out some previous posts I did on the subject here and here.
The DOL will accept public comments until Feb. 22, 2011 — via http://www.regulations.gov.
The Employer Handbook Blog