On June 28, 2024, the Supreme Court issued a highly-anticipated decision in the twin cases of Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Relentless, Inc. v. Dep’t of Commerce, which will now make it more difficult for federal agencies to issue rules and regulations that aim to carry out statutory mandates of Congress. The 6-3 decision overrules the 1984 decision Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense…
For years, federal courts have followed two mantras: (1) employment statutes should not function as “general civility” codes in the American workplace; and (2) Title VII is not a vehicle for a court to serve as a super-personnel department weighing the prudence of employments decisions. See, e.g., Burlington N. & Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. White, 548 U.S. 53, 68 (2006); Morgan v. Mylan Pharms. Inc., No.…
On April 20, 2023, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued an opinion, in Crozer Chester Medical Center v. NLRB, finding that two employers violated the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”) by refusing to produce portions of an Asset Purchase Agreement (“APA”) requested by a union.
By way of background, Crozer-Chester Medical Center (“Crozer”)—a nonprofit healthcare…
The Fourth Circuit issued a decision yesterday, reinforcing a plaintiff’s burden in employment discrimination cases. In Balderson v. Lincare Inc., No. 21-1753 (4th Cir. Mar. 15, 2023), a three-judge panel reversed the trial court’s conclusion that Chandra Balderson’s termination from employment was the result of discriminatory animus based on her sex. The trial court reached this conclusion after…
Under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), the workforce is divided into two groups: (1) hourly, non-exempt employees, who are entitled to overtime compensation for any time worked in excess of forty hours per week; and (2) salaried, exempt employees who are not entitled to overtime compensation. In order to classify someone as a salaried exempt employee, that person must be paid on a “salary…
Earlier this month, the Supreme Court received oral argument addressing the question of whether the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”) preempts a state-court lawsuit against a union for intentionally destroying an employer’s property during a labor dispute. In one of the most highly-anticipated labor cases before the Court in decades, the justices will decide Glacier Northwest, Inc. v.…
The Federal Trade Commission (the “FTC”) has been in the news lately regarding its proposed rule which would ban non-competes in a broad array of situations. In addition to its proposed rule, the FTC has recently issued a statement that it intends to vigorously enforce the Section 5's prohibition on unfair methods of competition. The FTC has recently taken legal action against three companies…
The Federal Trade Commission Moves on Non-Competes
On January 5, 2023, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) issued its proposed rulemaking on unfair methods of competition aimed at limiting the use of non-compete clauses between employers and employees. The FTC’s action follows President Biden’s July 9, 2021 Executive Order on “Promoting Competition in the American Economy,” directing the FTC use…
On February 10, 2022, Congress completed action on a significant, bipartisan reform of the Federal Arbitration Act. President Biden has already indicated his support for the bill, referred to as the “'Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021,” and is expected to sign it into law.
The bill will invalidate agreements to arbitrate sexual assault or sexual…
On Sunday, December 27, 2020, President Trump signed the “Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021,” (“the Act”) which includes a subtle, yet significant, amendment to the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (“FFCRA”).
To review, the FFCRA became effective on April 1, 2020, and requires employers with fewer than 500 employees to provide two types of paid leave regarding Covid-19: (1) Emergency…
Today, the Supreme Court of the United States handed down a decision affecting the civil rights of employees nationwide. In Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, the Supreme Court held, in a 6-3 decision, that an employer who discharges an individual for being “homosexual or transgender” violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The Court’s opinion, which can be accessed here, resolved…
