“Ban the Box" Coming to the Big Apple...

On June 29, 2015, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio signed into law an amendment to the New York City Human Rights Law that requires private employers to remove criminal-convictions questions from job applications and defer background inquiries to the point of a conditional job offer. This “Ban the Box” law prohibits NYC employers from making any inquiry or statement concerning an applicant’s arrest or criminal record until after the employer has extended a conditional job offer to the applicant. The law construes the terms “inquires” and “statements” very broadly, and also expressly prohibits searches of publicly available records and many consumer reports. More ›

EEOC gets Aggressive, will Start Treating all Sex Orientation Claims as Title VII Discrimination

Once upon a time, there was a plaintiff. This plaintiff had been passed over for a promotion because she was gay, so she sued her employer. When she looked at federal law, however, she found that Title VII did not include “sexual orientation” on its list of protected classes. So this plaintiff came up with a clever idea: she claimed that she actually was discriminated against based on her gender (a class listed in Title VII), arguing that the action was taken against her because she did not conform to gender stereotypes.   More ›

EEOC Uses its Record Keeping Requirements to Police use of Criminal Background Checks

We don't think about personnel files — we just have them. Everything from employment applications to benefits enrollment forms to discipline and discharge documents goes into those files. But did you know that the EEOC requires employers to keep all personnel and employment records for at least one year?  More ›

Cracks in the Fifield Armor?: New Dissent Marks First big Challenge to Illinois' Bright-Line Restrictive Covenant Rule

When continued employment is the sole consideration for a post-employment restrictive covenant (such as a noncompetition agreement), the Illinois Supreme Court requires that an employee be continually employed for a substantial period of time. Generally, a period of two-years is an adequately substantial period.  A strong dissent in a new Illinois opinion suggests that not all judges are on board with the bright-line rule recently endorsed by several Illinois courts. More ›

That's A Lotta Cheddar: Pizza Chain pays big to end Background Check Case

The parent company of Chuck E. Cheese's restaurants, CEC Entertainment, Inc., has agreed to pay $1.75M to settle a class action lawsuit in California brought by applicants who claimed the company provided improper background check notices during the hiring process.  More ›

Department of Labor Significantly Expanding Overtime Eligibility

The Department of Labor (DOL) recently issued proposed new rules that seek to expand overtime wage coverage to more than 4.6 million workers. These proposed rules are not yet final, and the DOL seeks comments. However, now is the time to begin considering how employees are classified, and whether they may continue to be exempt from overtime wages in the future. More ›

President Obama Proposes to Expand Overtime to over five Million Salaried Workers

On June 29, 2015, President Obama unveiled a dramatic change to the country's overtime pay law in an opinion piece published by the Huffington Post. The president's proposal seeks to extend overtime protection to nearly 5 million employees by raising the minimum threshold for guaranteed overtime pay from an annual salary of $23,660 to $50,440. Employees falling within the expansion would be guaranteed time-and-a-half for all hours worked over 40 hours in a week; in other words, if the rule takes effect as intended, the President will in one fell swoop have reverted a massive subsection of middle-income workers from exempt to non-exempt status, thereby entitling them to overtime pay. Further, going forward, the rule would link the minimum exemption salary to inflation levels, with the goal of avoiding another severe adjustment such as this in the future. More ›

Of Interest: U.S. Supreme Court Finds Constitutional Support For Same-Sex Marriage

Note: Though the Supreme Court's decision in Obergefell v. Hodges (issued today) does not directly implicate an employment issue, the opinion represents a significant shift in U.S. culture and society, and therefore is likely of import to many employers. Thus, we share a summary of the opinion.

In a monumental decision, the United States Supreme Court ruled today that same-sex marriage is a fundamental right protected by the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution. The laws of Michigan, Kentucky, Ohio and Tennessee defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman were upheld by the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit but then struck down by the Supreme Court's decision.  More ›

Violation of GINA Leads to Significant Jury Verdict Against Employer

Have you ever had a mystery employee defecating around your warehouse, damaging goods? Have you ever considered asking employees to provide cheek cell samples to determine the identity of the defecator? Hopefully, the answer to both questions is no. One Georgia employer, however, was not so lucky. More ›

Of Interest: U.S. Supreme Court Saves Obamacare a Second Time

Note: Though the Supreme Court's decision in King v. Burwell (issued today) does not directly implicate an employment issue, the opinion is quite significant and likely of interest to many employers who have been following the developments of the Affordable Care Act. Thus, we share a summary of the opinion addressing the latest challenge to the ACA prepared by our colleagues in Hinshaw's national Appellate Practice Group.

By a 6-3 margin, the Supreme Court has ruled in King v. Burwell that the provision in the Affordable Care Act (also known as "Obamacare") that offered tax credits to people who purchase health insurance on a health insurance exchange created under the ACA applied whether or not the exchange was established by a State or by the federal government. In doing so the Court saved the ACA from the consequences of what was largely thought to be a "scrivener's error," that is, a drafting mistake in a bill that was nearly 1,000 pages long. More ›