Industry News

When the Supreme Court struck down the federal definition of marriage as a legal union between one man and one woman earlier this year, there was substantial confusion over how federal employment laws would be enforced in states that did not recognize same-sex marriages. The Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA) of the Department of Labor (DOL) and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) have issued guidance on how the Supreme Court's decision will impact the administration and taxability of pension/retirement and group health benefits, while a revision last month to a Fact Sheet by the Wage and Hour Division (WHD) of the DOL, which enforces the Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”), indicates how the WHD will enforce the FMLA at least in the near term.

Although unemployed individuals were begging for unpaid internships just a few years ago, many unpaid interns are now bringing high-profile class actions seeking back pay and other damages for their services. Those claims have initially been successful.

In 2009, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc. that a plaintiff asserting a disparate-treatment claim under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) must prove that age was the but-for cause of the challenged employment action. The Court’s decision took many employment lawyers by surprise, in part, because that was not the issue on which certiorari had been granted. The Court had granted certiorari on the issue of whether a plaintiff was required to present direct evidence to obtain a mixed-motive jury instruction in an ADEA case. But addressing the “‘subsidiary’” question of the general standard of liability under the statute, the Court held that a mixed-motive jury instruction is never proper in an ADEA case. More specifically, the Court held that the burden of persuasion never shifts to the employer to show that it would have made the same adverse employment decision regardless of age – even after a plaintiff has produced evidence that age was a motivating factor in that decision.

On July 2, 2013, the United States Treasury Department announced a delay in the previously-scheduled 2014 deadlines for businesses to comply with the new health insurance mandated under the Affordable Care Act. Recognizing concerns about the complexity of the Act’s requirements and the need for more time to implement them effectively, the Obama Administration has decided to push the implementation date forward until 2015. The Treasury Department announced that it would publish formal guidance addressing the concerns which prompted the delay in mid-July 2013, however, at the time of publication, such announcement had not yet been made. While questions remain as to whether any additional legislative or regulatory changes may be made during the transition period, one thing that is for sure is that employers should use this additional time wisely and take initial steps towards ACA readiness.

Read this article to learn why how you respond to unemployment claims does matter. Featured in FLAME, The Magazine of the National Franchisee Associates (an association of BURGER KING ® franchisees) 2013 Issue 2

This article, written by Richard M. Escoffery and Joseph G. Bauer, MD, FACS, was published in the July 2012 issue of The Aesthetic Surgery Journal.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act: What should you be thinking about now to get ready? Featured in FLAME, The Magazine of the National Franchisee Associates (an association of BURGER KING ® franchisees) 2013 Issue 1

The pervasiveness of social media usage over the last decade has provided benefits to individuals, but added increased dangers for employers.