Follow Us on

Keeping You Posted

Recent developments in employment and labor law
RSS

hkastrinsky

Howard Kastrinsky

cbarrett

Chris Barrett


Keeping You Posted provides you with the latest updates in employment and labor law. As a supplement to Employment Law Comment, Keeping You Posted supplies you with a review of current federal and state cases, as well as legislative and regulatory changes, from your perspective as an employer.

Some of the many topics we discuss in Keeping You Posted include federal discrimination laws, the National Labor Relations Act, the Fair Labor Standards Act, and the Occupation Safety and Health act. Other topics include immigration and workplace privacy, including emerging trends in social media in the workplace. Add the RSS feed above to your favorites, and stay up-to-date on the issues that affect your Company.
BBRegister
Register for this month's Breakfast Briefing




Click here for a printable version of Employment Law Comment.

ACAbutton

 


Complaining About Manager on Facebook is Protected Activity

Monday, 13 May 2013 11:03


|

September, 2011 was the first ruling by the National Labor Relations Board (actually it was at the ALJ level) on the issue of firing employees who discussed terms and conditions of employment via social media (i.e. Facebook).  Since that time, the NLRB (the Board and ALJs) have issued a flood of decisions, as well as three General Counsel Advice Reports, on how to navigate the social media waters to properly terminate employees who violate a company’s lawfully-dubbed social media policy.  

Patrick Ogilvy discusses a recent social media decision handed down from the NLRB, in a textbook scenario of what employers should NOT do when faced with a Facebook-ranting situation.

   

Doctor’s Refusal to Perform Necessary Surgery on HIV-positive Patient Violated Patient’s Civil Rights

Monday, 06 May 2013 11:31


|

Employers have enough on their plate just managing the liability their own employees present.  Wouldn’t it be awful if Employers had to deal with anti-discrimination laws targeted at customers and clients too? Wait… They do.

One doctor recently got popped with a lawsuit after he refused to perform surgery on a patient.  But don’t professionals get to choose who they want to work with and not work with?

Max Nuyen gives a little insight on the real price Employers may pay for employees not doing their job.

   

Second Circuit Narrowly Construes When an Employer Must Provide Financial Information During Collective Bargaining Negotiations

Monday, 29 April 2013 09:54


|

In a victory for employers, the Second Circuit has overruled the NLRB, holding an employer is not required to provide information in the exact form that a union demands, particularly when the employer offers to produce confidential information in a different way to accommodate the union’s interests.

Allison Champagne has the details of this recent decision defining employer’s rights during collective bargaining.

   

Asset Purchase Agreements No Longer Protect Purchasers from Wage & Hour Claims Against Sellers

Wednesday, 24 April 2013 10:42


|

In a recent opinion written by the well-regarded, Judge Posner of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, the good Judge put a blow to companies looking to purchase other companies.  Along with the facility and operations, Judge Posner held that “absent a good reason,” the purchasing company is also liable for acquired employment law claims of it new employees and no contract will free them of such complaints.

Patricia Kryder has all the details.

   

Collective Action ≠ Class Action (at least at the certification stage)

Tuesday, 23 April 2013 07:51


|

Employers facing collective actions under the Fair Labor Standards Act received a shot in the arm from the U.S. Supreme Court earlier this month.  In Genesis Healthcare Corp. v. Symczyk, the Court held that where the named plaintiff’s claims had been mooted by the employer’s offer of judgment, the case was moot.  Under Genesis, an employer may be able to forestall a plaintiff’s ability to bring an FLSA collective action by offering to pay off that plaintiff’s individual claims.  This may provide a relatively inexpensive way to at least delay larger FLSA action and to take advantage of the FLSA’s two-year statute of limitations.  Lee Williams explains more about the case.

   

Page 21 of 28

<< Start < Prev 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Next > End >>