U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Relaxed Standard for Injunctive Relief Under Section 10(j) of the National Labor Relations Act

On June 13, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Starbucks Corp. v. McKinney (National Labor Relations Board), No. 23-367, rejected the arguments of the National Labor Relations Board (the “Board”) to relax the standard that a district court must employ in deciding whether to implement injunctive relief under Section 10(j) of the National Labor Relations Act (the “Act”).  More ›

The 12 Days of California Labor and Employment Series – Day 10 "Wage Theft Updates for 2024"

In the spirit of the season, we are using our annual "12 days of the holidays" blog series to address new California laws and their impact on California employers. On the tenth day of the holidays, my labor and employment attorney gave to me ten lords a-leaping and AB 636 and AB 594. More ›

New York City Amends Safe and Sick Time Regulations

On September 15, 2023, the New York City Department of Consumer and Worker Protection issued amended rules relating to the New York City Earned Safe and Sick Time Act (“ESSTA”). The amendments codified the New York City Council statutory amendments to the ESSTA in 2020, which was designed to align the ESSTA with the New York State Paid Sick Leave Law. The amended rules went into effect on October 15, 2023. More ›

Sixth Circuit Decision In Police Officer Termination Case Offers Valuable Insights for Public Employers in Addressing Complaints About Systemic Workplace Concerns

Public employers have interests that differ from private employers. While both types of employers seek to increase their revenues, public employers have additional concerns that can take priority over short-term budgetary interests, such as maintaining public safety. Those interests can conflict with their employees' First Amendment rights to communicate on matters of public concern. In these circumstances, the law must balance the interests of public sector employees to speak on matters of public concern and the interests of public employers in applying proper workplace rules that promote and maintain cohesion, order, and teamwork—especially in the area of law enforcement. More ›

U.S. Supreme Court Holds the ADEA Applies to All Public Employers

In a recent 8-0 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision holding the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) applies to public employers of any size. More ›

Ninth Circuit Says Age Discrimination Laws Apply to Public Employers of Any Size

In Guido v. Mount Lemmon Fire District, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) applies to public employers of any size.

John Guido and Dennis Rankin were hired by Mount Lemmon Fire District (in Arizona) in 2000. They served as fire captains until June 15, 2009, when they were laid off. At the time of the layoffs, Guido was 46 and Rankin was 54 years of age. They were the oldest employees at the Fire District. In April 2013, the two sued their former employer for age discrimination. More ›