Industry News

As noted in our December 11, 2013 e-lert, whether the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) prohibits employers from requiring class and collective action waivers, is far from settled.

In Siring v. Oregon State Bd. of Higher Educ., an Oregon federal district court held that the but-for standard of causation applicable to claims under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), as well as to retaliation claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), is not applicable to discrimination claims under the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA). Instead, the court concluded, “the causation standard for ADA discrimination claims is „motivating factor.‟” The plaintiff prevailed on her ADA claim at a jury trial conducted shortly thereafter.

Do you have a workplace bully?

Read this intersting article discussing 13 ways restaurants get tangled in wage and hour violations and how they can be avoided.

As we noted in our August 15, 2013 e-lert, although the federal courts have generally upheld employee agreements to proceed individually, rather than as part of a class or collective action, on arbitration of employment claims, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has held that such agreements violate the National Labor Relations Act.

As noted in our December 11, 2013 e-lert, whether the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) prohibits employers from requiring class and collective action waivers, is far from settled.

The rules regarding tips and service charges are about to change. Are you ready?

Read this interesting article which provides tips on avoiding an immigration compliance “ICE” storm in your restaurant.

In 2001, a Tennessee federal court slapped Treetop Enterprises, Inc., a Waffle House franchisee, with a damage award of over $2.8 million dollars (plus prejudgment interest and attorneys’ fees) in a lawsuit alleging that Treetop had misclassified its managers as exempt from overtime compensation under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”). While astonishing at the time, it proved to be the precursor to a cottage industry of copycat lawsuits — with companies like Taco Bell and a whole host of others being hit with huge damage awards or agreeing to costly settlement demands.

Social media sites like Facebook® and LinkedIn present new opportunities for businesses. At the same time, they also present significant risks. As the legal landscape regarding social media continues to develop, business policies and practices must be revisited frequently to account for emerging issues. One such issue involves the use of social media as a tool for unfair competition.

Are you asking yourself, “What is a BYOD Policy and why do we need one?” In environments where individuals are wired 24/7 and are using personal smart phones, tablets, laptops, etc. for work, electronic communications policies, including a “Bring Your Own Device (BYOD)” policy, are necessary both to address the work-related use of electronic devices and to protect the employer’s right to manage such use.

Several states, including Georgia and Texas, have changed the way they address unfair competition laws, including those regarding restrictive covenants and trade secrets. While these changes may be “old news” to companies that are located in or otherwise employ individuals in these States, the impact of these changes has never been more relevant, and many companies have failed to take advantage of the new protections they afford. In fact, all companies, regardless of their location or that of their workforce, should regularly review their restrictive covenants and the applicable law to ensure they have the appropriate protections in place.

It should hopefully come as no surprise to employers that federal law prohibits sexual harassment – including when the harasser and victim are the same sex. But, what if an employee is harassed for not being masculine or feminine enough? A recent Fifth Circuit case suggests that harassment based on gender stereotyping, if severe or pervasive, can be same-sex sexual harassment, and the failure to avoid such conduct can be costly.

Employers’ long-standing practice of using criminal background checks to screen potential hires is under heightened scrutiny by both federal and state governments.

In the age of technology, some businesses are opting away from issuing paychecks to employees. Instead, some are choosing to pay employees using payroll debit cards. This practice recently attracted scrutiny, however, after a former worker at a large fast-food chain filed a class-action lawsuit alleging employees were not offered the chance to be paid by check.