Last week, U.S. Secretary of Labor Lori Chavez-DeRemer issued Order 08-2025 and the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) issued a Bulletin explaining the Secretary’s Order. Importantly for federal contractors, “OFCCP will be exercising its discretion to administratively close all pending compliance reviews and will take no further action related to the scheduling list
Updates
Washington Employers: Key Legal Changes on the Horizon
Washington’s legislature has approved two bills poised to significantly reshape employer obligations around layoffs and job postings. Though not yet signed into law, both bills—if enacted—will require prompt action and policy updates from employers operating in the state.
Mini-WARN Act: More Notice, Broader Reach
Senate Bill 5525, modeled on the federal WARN Act, ups the…
EEO-1 Component 1 Reporting Updates
Edited May 20, 2025
Last month, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) submitted a proposed 2024 EEO-1 instruction booklet to the Office of Management and Budget. If the proposal is approved, the EEO-1 reporting period will begin on May 20, 2025 and run through June 24, 2025. As employers prepare to file their 2024 EEO-1…
Federal Court of Appeals Stays Preliminary Injunction on Trump DEI Executive Orders
On Friday, March 14, 2025, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals lifted a preliminary injunction on President Trump’s Executive Orders regarding DEI. In concurring opinions, the judges expressed varying levels of support for employers’ DEI initiatives. However, the appellate panel agreed that the district court’s pre-implementation preliminary injunction was premature, and the Fourth Circuit stayed…
Trump Executive Order Significantly Limits Longstanding DEI Requirements for Federal Contractors
On his second day in office, January 21, 2025, President Trump issued an Executive Order “Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity.” This Executive Order reverses roughly 60 years of federal policy and leaves many employers with questions about the future of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) policies and affirmative action programs (AAPs). Federal contractors…
The DEI Executive Order: Preparing for Federal Oversight and Compliance Risks
On January 21, 2025, the White House announced an Executive Order entitled “Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity.” The Order instructs federal agencies to take administrative and legal action against diversity, equity, and inclusion (“DEI”) programs, which it defines as systems of race- and sex-based preferences. The Order is directed at both public- and…
Federal Court strikes down FTC rule that would have banned non-competition agreements starting September 4
On Tuesday, August 20, a federal judge in Texas shot down the Federal Trade Commission’s rule banning noncompete agreements (“the Rule”) that was set to take effect September 4. This means that the FTC cannot enforce the Rule. As a result, enforceable non-competes currently in place remain enforceable, and businesses and workers are free to…
Employers Face June 1 Deadline to Inform Employees Whose Approved OFLA Leave Is Affected by Recent OFLA Amendments
As we previously advised, under Oregon Senate Bill 1515 (“SB 1515”) effective July 1, 2024, most of the Oregon Family Leave Act (“OFLA”)—including leave for the employee’s or a family member’s serious health condition—will sunset. (Pregnancy disability, sick child, and bereavement leave remain available under OFLA.) Employees may instead look to other applicable leave…
California Supreme Court Sweeps PAGA Manageability Under the Rug in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills
On January 18, 2024, the California Supreme Court issued its long-awaited opinion in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills to decide the question of whether California trial courts have inherent authority to strike claims brought under California’s Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) on the grounds that the claims were not manageable. The Court ultimately upheld the appellate court’s holding, which we previously discussed in detail here, finding that trial courts do not have such inherent authority.Continue Reading California Supreme Court Sweeps PAGA Manageability Under the Rug in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills
NLRB Returns to Longstanding Position Limiting Use of Confidentiality, Non-Disclosure, and Non-Disparagement Clauses in Employee Severance Agreements
The General Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), Jennifer A. Abruzzo, issued guidance on March 22, 2023, about the NLRB’s McLaren Macomb, 372 NLRB No. 58, decision from February 21, 2023, which reinstated a limit on the confidentiality, non-disclosure, and non-disparagement clauses that employers may include in severance agreements with most of their lower-level employees.[1] While not law, the General Counsel’s guidance is intended to address the uncertainty among employers regarding what language is deemed acceptable to include in severance agreements and what language may create liability under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) following McLaren Macomb.[2]
The McLaren Macomb decision specifically held that employers may not condition severance on the employee’s waiver of rights protected by the NLRA and that agreements between employers and employees that restrict employees from engaging in activity protected by the NLRA or from filing unfair labor practice (ULP) charges with the NLRB, helping other employees in doing so, or assisting during the Agency’s investigatory process are unlawful. The NLRB observed that the employer’s offer is itself an attempt to deter employees from exercising their statutory rights, at a time when employees may feel they must give up their rights in order to get the benefits provided in the agreement. It also provided that the conduct of an employer is irrelevant to assessing the lawfulness of a severance agreement, and the plain language of the severance agreement alone can constitute a violation. While the Maclaren Macomb decision has been described as a return to the standard applied in earlier cases, many speculate that it indicates that the NLRB intends to take a broader view of how severance agreements infringe on employees’ rights under Section 7 of the NLRA.Continue Reading NLRB Returns to Longstanding Position Limiting Use of Confidentiality, Non-Disclosure, and Non-Disparagement Clauses in Employee Severance Agreements