Tag: v

NLRB Effectively Scraps Plans (For Now) To Pursue Notice Posting Rule By Deciding Not To Seek Review By U.S. Supreme Court

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has suffered a series of setbacks recently at the hands of federal judges.  In December, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals largely struck down the NLRB’s prohibition on class action waivers in arbitration agreements.  Now, on January 6, 2014, the NLRB announced that it won’t seek Supreme Court review of two U.S. Court of … Continue Reading

Supreme Court Holds Title VII Can Cover Third Party Retaliation Claims

The United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion today in Thompson v. North American Stainless, LP., 562 U.S. ___ (2011), that confirms the expansive scope of persons protected by Title VII. The Court held that it is unlawful for an employer to intentionally harm one employee in order to retaliate against another employee who engaged in … Continue Reading

Ninth Circuit Approves of “Preemptive” Fitness for Duty Examination

Yesterday the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a decision approving of an employer’s use of a "preemptive" fitness for duty examination for an employee who exhibited bizarre and erratic behavior in the workplace, even though that behavior had not yet impacted his job performance.  Click here to read the full opinion in Brownfield v. City … Continue Reading

Supreme Court issues Favorable Ruling for Employers in Texting/Privacy Case

Yesterday the United States Supreme Court issued a long-anticipated decision in City of Ontario v. Quon, unanimously ruling that a search of sexually explicit personal text messages sent by a police officer using his department pager was reasonable and did not violate the individual officer’s privacy rights. At issue was the right of a government employer … Continue Reading

Court Dismisses Lawsuit Against Oregon Mandatory Meeting Law

Last week a federal judge dismissed a lawsuit aimed at blocking SB 519, the Oregon law the prohibits employers from requiring employees to attend meeting about, among other things, labor unions.  Click here to read the District of Oregon’s opinion in Associated Oregon Industries v. Avakian.  SB 519, passed by the Oregon legislature in 2009, … Continue Reading

Supreme Court To Decide Scope of Cat’s Paw in Employment Cases

  Yesterday, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Staub v. Proctor Hospital to address the question of when an employer may be held liable in “cat’s paw” situations, where an employee with unlawful intent influences a decisionmaker but is not involved in making the ultimate employment decision. In this case the employee, Vincent Staub, was … Continue Reading

Oregon Supreme Court: Employers Are Not Required to Accommodate Medical Marijuana

Yesterday the Oregon Supreme Court conclusively ruled that employers are not required to accommodate the use of medical marijuana in the workplace, ending years of doubt and confusion on this critical issue. Click here to read the Court’s opinion in Emerald Steel Fabricators, Inc. v. Bureau of Labor and Industries. In Emerald Steel, a drill … Continue Reading

Ninth Circuit Issues Split Decisions on Compensation for Travel Time and “Off-the-Clock” Work

  Employees who drive company vehicles between home and work will find little to cheer about in a recent Ninth Circuit decision . . . unless they live in California.  In Rutti v. Lojack Corporation, a three-judge panel refused to relax the rule that commuting time is non-compensable under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).   The employee, who installed vehicle recovery systems, contended … Continue Reading

9th Circuit: Independent Contractor Can Assert Disability Claim Under Rehabilitation Act

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled recently that an independent contractor may assert a disability claim against an employer under the Rehabilitation Act.  Click the link to read the opinion on Fleming v. Yuma Regional Medical Center.  The Rehabilitation Act prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in programs conducted by Federal agencies, in programs receiving … Continue Reading

Supreme Court Lets Stand Ruling Allowing EEOC to Issue Subpoenas After Right-To-Sue

Yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision that allows the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to continue investigating allegations of employment discrimination, and even to issue subpoenas to employers, after issuing a right-to-sue letter to the employee who filed the initial complaint.  Click here to read the Ninth Circuit decision in … Continue Reading

The First Monday in October: Supreme Court Roundup

The first Monday in October traditionally marks the beginning of the United States Supreme Court’s yearly term – and it provides an excellent opportunity to look at the cases the Court will be hearing this year.  In an earlier post, the World of Work brought you detailed discussion of the Court’s only Title VII case this term:  Lewis v. City of Chicago.  … Continue Reading

California Supreme Court: No Privacy Violation for Employer’s Placement of Video Camera in Employees’ Office

The California Supreme Court has issued its decision in Hernandez v. Hillsides, Inc., finding that an employer’s placement of a hidden camera in an office used by two employees did not violate the employees’ right to privacy.  This case has been closely watched (OK, pun intended) as it worked its way through the appellate courts.  Like all workplace privacy … Continue Reading

DOT Reinstates Observed Urination Drug Testing Rule for Safety-Sensitive Positions

Yesterday the Department of Transportation (DOT) reinstated its rule that employers must conduct observed urination drug testing for all return-to-duty and follow-up tests for transportation workers in safety-sensitive positions.  The new regulations will apply to workers in safety-sensitive positions in the aviation, motor carrier, rail, transit, maritime, and pipeline industries.  Click here to read the … Continue Reading

Managers Individually Liable for Unpaid Wages Despite Employer’s Bankruptcy

A recent case should strike fear into the hearts of all upper-level managers and human resources professionals:  in Boucher v. Shaw, the Ninth Circuit ruled that individual managers were liable for their subordinates’ unpaid wages, even though the employer company filed for bankruptcy.  In Boucher, a group of former casino employees sued the CEO, CFO and … Continue Reading

Another Circuit Court Agrees: ADA Amendments Act is Not Retroactive

Congress did not intend for the ADA Amendments Act (ADAAA) to be retroactive, the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled yesterday, and applied pre-ADAAA law to dismiss an employment discrimination claim.  Click here to read the court’s decision in Lytes v. DC Water and Sewer Authority.  Congress passed the ADAAA in 2008 and the new … Continue Reading

Bus Driver’s “Shy Bladder Syndrome” a Disability

A school bus driver who was demoted after his "shy bladder syndrome" left him unable to comply with his employer’s drug testing procedures may proceed with claims under the Americans with Disabilites Act (ADA) according to a recent ruling from a Tennessee federal court.  Click here to read the full opinion in Melman v. Metropolitan Government … Continue Reading

Washington Supreme Court Decides Morgan v. Kingen – Bankruptcy is No Defense

The Washington Supreme Court issued a decision today in Morgan v. Kingen, holding that bankruptcy is not a valid defense to a willful withholding of wages under RCW 49.52.070.  The plaintiffs in this case worked at Funsters Grand Casino in SeaTac, Washington.  The casino was not a success and the owners voluntarily filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy … Continue Reading

Seventh Circuit Rules FLSA Doesn’t Protect Verbal Complaints

Most employment lawyers and HR professionals know that firing an employee for making a complaint about being paid properly is a recipe for disaster.  This week in Kasten v. Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics Corp., the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals thought differently, at least for verbal complaints about violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act. The plaintiff, Kevin Kasten, was … Continue Reading

Oregon Legislature Bans Mandatory Meetings

A new Oregon bill will prohibit employers from requiring employees to attend mandatory or "captive audience" meetings on, among other topics, labor unions.  Governor Ted Kulongoski is expected to sign the bill, which would them become law effective January 1, 2010.  Click here to read SB 519.  SB 519 prohibits an employer from taking action against an … Continue Reading

Supreme Court Tightens Standards for Age Discrimination Plaintiffs

Yesterday the United States Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that trial courts may not use a "mixed motive" framework in federal age discrimination cases.  Rather, plaintiffs in age discrimination cases must prove that "but for" their age, they would not have been discriminated against.  Click here to read the Court’s decision in Gross v. FBL Financial Services.  Under a 1991 … Continue Reading

Former Employee Wins $4.1 Billion, Dr. Evil Award

An arbitrator recently awarded $4.1 billion in favor of the former chief marketing officer of iFreedom  Communications Inc., finding that iFreedom breached his employment contract by firing him without cause.  You read that right:  $4.1 billion, with a "b."  U.S. Dollars, not Zimbabwean.  Don’t believe us?  You can read the opinion yourself:  Chester v. iFreedom Communications … Continue Reading

Another Day, Another E-Verify Delay

It seems like just a couple days ago that we reported that implementation of the E-Verify System was delayed until June 30.  Actually, it was a couple days ago.  Well, you can forget that; the The Department of Homeland Security’s Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) has announced that it will delay mandatory use of E-Verify, this … Continue Reading

Starbucks Obtains Reversal of $105 Million “Tip Sharing” Case

Just over a year ago, we reported about a $105 million California verdict in favor of Starbucks baristas who were required to pool their tips with supervisors.  As you might expect, Starbucks appealed that decision.  Yesterday, a California Court reversed the decision.  Click here to read the decision in Chau v. Starbucks. The 4th District … Continue Reading
LexBlog