Since the enactment of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) in the late 1930s, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) has issued opinion letters as a means of providing guidance to workers, employers, and other stakeholders regarding the application of federal employment laws.
Continue Reading U.S. Department of Labor Issues Six Opinion Letters Addressing FLSA and FMLA
In a significant development for employers, on July 10, 2023, California Governor Newsom revitalized the Industrial Welfare Commission (IWC) by allocating it $3,000,000 as part of the state’s 2023 budget bill (AB 102). AB 102 takes effect immediately. The IWC is a quasi-legislative agency within the California Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) established to investigate
While perhaps overlooked in favor of other high-profile rulings (we’re looking at you, Viking River Cruises), the California Supreme Court’s decision in Naranjo v. Spectrum Security Services, Inc., No. S258966 (Cal. May. 23, 2022) may turn out to be one of the most significant cases of the year for California employers. As we
The California Court of Appeal ruled in Seviour-Iloff v. LaPaille1 that employees could pursue Labor Code-based claims against executives of their employer, personally. The court found that Labor Code section 558.1 provides a private right of action for employees to pursue claims against their employer or “a person acting on behalf of an employer”
On April 4, 2022, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) held, in Reuter v. City of Methuen, that the Massachusetts Wage Act, G.L. c. 149, § 148, requires courts to award triple damages to successful plaintiffs paid their wages late—even if their employer paid them in full and regardless of whether the wages were
On Sept. 9, 2021, the California Court of Appeal in Wesson v. Staples The Office Superstore, LLC, supported what employers have been arguing since Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claims became the norm in wage and hour litigation: courts can and should strike PAGA actions if they are unmanageable.
Summary of the case:
The
Join Greenberg Traurig’s Tiffany S. Fordyce and Ryan P. O’Connor on June 25 1-2 p.m. ET for a Practising Law Institute online program, “Work from Home Considerations: What Employers Should Know.“
Remote work became a reality for thousands of employers and millions of employees across the country over the past year. Even as
Much has been written cautioning employers about the twin holdings of Donohue v. AMN Services LLC, in which the California Supreme Court said on Feb. 25 that employers “cannot engage in the practice of rounding time punches … in the meal period context,” and a “rebuttable presumption of meal period violations” will apply when
On Feb. 25, 2021, the California Supreme Court issued its much-anticipated decision in Donohue v. AMN Services, LLC. The opinion answers two important questions: (1) whether “employers can[] engage in the practice of rounding time punches – that is, adjusting the hours that an employee has actually worked to the nearest preset time increment
On the heels of our reporting that new DOL joint employment regulations are set to take effect March 16, the NLRB jumped into the fray and issued a final rule effective April 27, 2020, restoring a joint employment standard that had been followed for several decades prior to the Browning-Ferris decision issued by the