Fisher Phillips News: Recent Episodes
Fisher Phillips
AI is quickly becoming an essential operational and strategic tool for employers in all industries, and manufacturing is no exception. From optimizing organizations’ HR functions to ensuring work environments are safe and productive, AI is influencing just about every aspect of work. And we are just scratching the surface on understanding the value this technology can drive.
In this two-part episode of "Manufacturing Success," Michael Carrouth is joined by David Walton, the Chair of Fisher Phillips’ Artificial Intelligence Team, for a discussion about how manufacturing employers can and should leverage this technology, and how doing so correctly can create a sustainable competitive advantage for any manufacturing employer.
AI is quickly becoming an essential operational and strategic tool for employers in all industries, and manufacturing is no exception. From optimizing organizations’ HR functions to ensuring work environments are safe and productive, AI is influencing just about every aspect of work. And we are just scratching the surface on understanding the value this technology can drive.
In this two-part episode of "Manufacturing Success," Michael Carrouth is joined by David Walton, the Chair of Fisher Phillips’ Artificial Intelligence Team, for a discussion about how manufacturing employers can and should leverage this technology, and how doing so correctly can create a sustainable competitive advantage for any manufacturing employer.
Much has been written about an historically low unemployment rate, and the related challenges that manufacturing employers face in trying to fill a significant backlog of job openings. Despite this glut of available jobs, the need to implement reductions in force (RIFs) does present itself more often than might be expected, for a wide range of business reasons that are disconnected from unemployment figures. And like other aspects of employment law, there are associated rules and best practices that can go a long way to reducing, or even eliminating, the risk of legal missteps on the part of management. Manufacturing employers should take care to become familiar with these rules and best practices, to minimize the threat of business disruption that often accompanies RIFs.
In this three-part episode of Manufacturing Success, host Mike Carrouth is joined by Fisher Phillips attorneys J. Hagood Tighe, David Kresser, and Terri Stewart for discussions around the three core elements of a successful RIF; layoff planning, notice requirements, and severance agreements. For more information about RIFs, please refer to:
- An Employer’s 7-Step RIF and Layoff Blueprint for 2023
- RIF/WARN Toolkit
Much has been written about an historically low unemployment rate, and the related challenges that manufacturing employers face in trying to fill a significant backlog of job openings. Despite this glut of available jobs, the need to implement reductions in force (RIFs) does present itself more often than might be expected, for a wide range of business reasons that are disconnected from unemployment figures. And like other aspects of employment law, there are associated rules and best practices that can go a long way to reducing, or even eliminating, the risk of legal missteps on the part of management. Manufacturing employers should take care to become familiar with these rules and best practices, to minimize the threat of business disruption that often accompanies RIFs.
In this three-part episode of Manufacturing Success, host Mike Carrouth is joined by Fisher Phillips attorneys J. Hagood Tighe, David Kresser, and Terri Stewart for discussions around the three core elements of a successful RIF; layoff planning, notice requirements, and severance agreements. For more information about RIFs, please refer to:
- An Employer’s 7-Step RIF and Layoff Blueprint for 2023
- RIF/WARN Toolkit
Much has been written about an historically low unemployment rate, and the related challenges that manufacturing employers face in trying to fill a significant backlog of job openings. Despite this glut of available jobs, the need to implement reductions in force (RIFs) does present itself more often than might be expected, for a wide range of business reasons that are disconnected from unemployment figures. And like other aspects of employment law, there are associated rules and best practices that can go a long way to reducing, or even eliminating, the risk of legal missteps on the part of management. Manufacturing employers should take care to become familiar with these rules and best practices, to minimize the threat of business disruption that often accompanies RIFs.
In this three-part episode of Manufacturing Success, host Mike Carrouth is joined by Fisher Phillips attorneys J. Hagood Tighe, David Kresser, and Terri Stewart for discussions around the three core elements of a successful RIF; layoff planning, notice requirements, and severance agreements. For more information about RIFs, please refer to:
- An Employer’s 7-Step RIF and Layoff Blueprint for 2023
- RIF/WARN Toolkit
Issues concerning workplace safety represent a significant source of challenges to employers’ approach to legal compliance. This is the case across industries, however for obvious reasons the threat is especially acute for manufacturers. And while this reality is hardly newsworthy on its own, the COVID-19 pandemic has for three years forced a dramatic reallocation of OSHA’s time and energy. But with the ebb of certain pandemic-era safety mandates, comes an offsetting – and in some cases enhanced – flow of priorities more suited to “normal” times. Manufacturing employers would be well advised to become reacquainted with OSHA’s typical posture, as well as the practical steps that can be taken to reduce your risk profile.
In this two-part episode of Manufacturing Success, host Mike Carrouth is joined by Curt Moore, a partner in the Charlotte office and senior member of the Workplace Safety Practice Group at Fisher Phillips. Part 1 outlines certain of the current and emerging trends that employers can expect to confront concerning priority actions at OSHA, and Part 2 offers a practical assessment of what employers can do to ensure a level of safety and compliance in the workplace that reduces the risk of being selected for an OSHA inspection. Click here to listen to Part 1.
Issues concerning workplace safety represent a significant source of challenges to employers’ approach to legal compliance. This is the case across industries, however for obvious reasons the threat is especially acute for manufacturers. And while this reality is hardly newsworthy on its own, the COVID-19 pandemic has for three years forced a dramatic reallocation of OSHA’s time and energy. But with the ebb of certain pandemic-era safety mandates, comes an offsetting – and in some cases enhanced – flow of priorities more suited to “normal” times. Manufacturing employers would be well advised to become reacquainted with OSHA’s typical posture, as well as the practical steps that can be taken to reduce your risk profile.
In this two-part episode of Manufacturing Success, host Mike Carrouth is joined by Curt Moore, a partner in the Charlotte office and senior member of the Workplace Safety Practice Group at Fisher Phillips. Part 1 outlines certain of the current and emerging trends that employers can expect to confront concerning priority actions at OSHA, and Part 2 offers a practical assessment of what employers can do to ensure a level of safety and compliance in the workplace that reduces the risk of being selected for an OSHA inspection. Click here to listen to Part 2.
In this episode of Manufacturing Success, we look into some of the issues concerning wage and hour compliance in the manufacturing industry. It is not a secret that manufacturers are racing to hire as many employees as possible to replace an entire generation of workers who are reaching retirement age. However, recruitment is not the only difficulty manufacturers face; manufacturers are challenged with managing wage and hour compliance amidst a fast-paced environment. From preventing unauthorized overtime and off-the-clock work to automatic meal deductions, employers in manufacturing are constantly having to conduct quality control audits on their own pay practices. Listen to how Fisher Phillips attorneys address those wage and hour challenges employers in manufacturing uniquely face.
Business leaders in the manufacturing industry must continually assess the efficiency of their organizations’ operations. A significant piece of the math that helps to measure efficiency comes down to geography. Where are your operations based? How accessible is it to your supplier partners? What about proximity to rail and other modes of transportation? Does it feature an appealing structure for tax incentives? Can you draw on a healthy supply of high-quality workers? These are just a few of the critically important questions that manufacturing employers should consider when exploring the issue of site selection. Choosing the right location to conduct your business can spell the difference between success and failure; is your business team asking the right questions?
In this episode of Manufacturing Success, host Mike Carrouth is joined by Ray Perez, Of Counsel in the Columbus office of Fisher Phillips and co-chair of the Site Selection and Incentives Practice Group for a conversation around the business of site selection. No two states, cities, or even towns are exactly the same, so being careful and strategic as to where you base operations can have a massive impact on your bottom line. Measure twice, and cut once because you may not get a chance to try again.
The NLRB remains in the midst of an extremely active year, defined in no small part by the drive to roll back certain pro-employer initiatives implemented by the Trump Administration. A swinging pendulum of priorities from one administration to the next is pro forma for the NLRB. But the 2023 swing projects to be more pronounced than many other years.
In this episode of Manufacturing Success, host Mike Carrouth is joined by Steve Bernstein, co-chair of Fisher Phillips’ Labor Relations Practice Group, for another look at the NLRB and it’s packed agenda of priorities. Specifically, the efforts being taken to eliminate or restrict the ability of employers to meet with employees during union organizing drives and lawfully share facts that allow for an informed decision on unionization. These so-called “captive audience” meetings, which are routinely conducted to educate employees, and have been a staple in the American workplace since Congress amended labor laws to recognize employer free-speech rights 75 years ago, seem poised for an abrupt ending this year.
2023 is shaping up to be one of the more active years at the NLRB in recent memory. The Biden Board has already started rolling back a number of pro-employer initiatives implemented during the Trump Administration, but the most significant efforts to support organized labor have yet to unfold.
In this two-part episode of Manufacturing Success, host Mike Carrouth is joined by Steve Mitchell, co-chair of Fisher Phillips’ Manufacturing Industry Group to preview the anticipated return of the Joy Silk Doctrine and the impact resurrecting of this old doctrine could have on employee relations for employers all across our country. Dragging the Joy Silk Doctrine back from the dead seems to be the main strategy to eliminate the secret-ballot voting process currently used by the NLRB. Don’t be alarmed if the name Joy Silk does not ring any bells; it references a Board decision from 1949, and was phased out more than 50 years ago.
Click here to listen to Part 1 of the podcast.
2023 is shaping up to be one of the more active years at the NLRB in recent memory. The Biden Board has already started rolling back a number of pro-employer initiatives implemented during the Trump Administration, but the most significant efforts to support organized labor have yet to unfold.
In this two-part episode of Manufacturing Success, host Mike Carrouth is joined by Steve Mitchell, co-chair of Fisher Phillips’ Manufacturing Industry Group to preview the anticipated return of the Joy Silk Doctrine and the impact resurrecting of this old doctrine could have on employee relations for employers all across our country. Dragging the Joy Silk Doctrine back from the dead seems to be the main strategy to eliminate the secret-ballot voting process currently used by the NLRB. Don’t be alarmed if the name Joy Silk does not ring any bells; it references a Board decision from 1949, and was phased out more than 50 years ago.
On January 5th 2023, the FTC took historic action ostensibly aimed at stamping out the “unfair” use of non-complete clauses in employment contracts. The proposed rule is broad and sweeping, with thousands of employers and millions of employees set to be impacted if it takes effect. For now, the FTC’s efforts can be characterized as “throwing the baby out with the bath water.” But there is a long way to go, and a lot to consider before allowing panic to set it. In this episode of Manufacturing Success, host Mike Carrouth talks with Michael Elkon, co-chair of Fisher Phillips Employee Defection and Trade Secrets practice group, about the proposed rule; how we got here, what happens next, and practical suggestions employers may want to consider while the FTC’s proposed seismic change to business practices moves forward. For more information on the FTC’s proposed rule change, please reference Fisher Phillips’ recently published Insights on the issue:
- FTC Proposes the End of Employment-Based Non-Compete Agreements
- Frequently Asked Questions About the FTC’s Proposal to Ban Non-Compete Agreements
In the first episode of “Manufacturing Success,” host Mike Carrouth is joined by David Walton for a high-level discussion around the increasingly important topic of people analytics and how its associated principles relate to human resources in the workplace. Big data, analytics, artificial intelligence and human resource functions come together at a workplace crossroads that can have a big impact on how manufacturers approach employee relations. Approximately 80% of human resource departments – including those of manufacturers - currently utilize some form of these people analytics in connection with recruiting, hiring, performance management, compensation, training and other practices.
But the laws regulating their use are murky at best, and non-existent at worst. So how can (and should) manufacturers come to understand and take advantage of these powerful technologies, without running afoul of the law? Start by joining Mike and David for this interactive and forward-thinking discussion, designed to provide a baseline education in this evolving area of technology and law.
More than a half-year has passed since the Supreme Court ruled in Van Buren v. United States that one "exceeds authorized access" by accessing off-limit files and other information on a computer system they were otherwise authorized to access, effectively narrowing the applicability of the CFAA in prosecuting cybersecurity and computer crime. At that time, Brent Cossrow and Dave Walton shared rapid reactions and perspectives in Part I of this broadcast. Soon afterwards, they reviewed the first wave of cases that discussed Van Buren in Part II. And in this episode, they are back to analyze a fresh slate of cases that were directly informed by this new “gates up or down” era for employers seeking to protect workplace computers and electronically stored information.
In this episode, Brent Cossrow and Dave Walton are joined by Risa Boerner, Chair of the Data Security and Workplace Privacy Practice Group at Fisher Phillips, for a discussion around employee privacy through the lens of Stengart v. Loving Care Agency, Inc., 990 A.2d 650 (2010). Though more than 10 year old, the New Jersey Supreme Court’s decision in Stengart continues to manifest itself on a very regular basis. To what extent may employees expect privacy and confidentiality in personal e-mails composed on company-owned computers? According to the New Jersey Supreme Court, there should be a "reasonable" expectation of privacy in personal e-mails on company computers, and that attorney–client communication privileges and privacy should not be violated. But technology and the work environment have evolved considerably in the past 11 years. Join Brent, Dave and Risa as they unpack certain of the interpretations and applications the passage of time allows for, and how employers should respond.
In this episode, Brent Cossrow and Dave Walton wrap up their discussion around the intersection of data analytics and the workplace. Having reviewed the basics of big data in practical terms (Part I) and how powerful algorithms designed for use in theaters of war are making their way into HR departments across the country (Part II), Brent and Dave dig a little deeper into use-cases for this technology and the accompanying risks that organizations take on by leveraging these new tools. Questions of discrimination present themselves in new ways that organizations and their counsel must be cognizant of to avoid legal trouble.
In this episode, Brent Cossrow and Dave Walton continue their discussion around the intersection of data analytics and the workplace. Powerful algorithms designed for use in theaters of war have made their way into HR departments across the country, helping organizations in connection with training, promotion, recruitment, hiring and more. The technology is strong and its impact on HR functions is clear, but what about the risk? Generally speaking, the law lags behind technology. So while there is no compelling reason not to use the best tools available, certain precautions should be undertaken to protect organizations and individuals against the threat of litigation, down the road.
Click here to listen to the first installment of this series: Big Data, Analytics and the Workplace, Part I
In this episode, Brent Cossrow and Dave Walton review the basics of big data in practical terms. What are analytics and why is discussion of their value so pervasive? How, when and why does the use analytics move from the realm of data scientists to the desks of human resource professionals and in-house counsel? Like so many aspects of employment law, the answers are both complicated and evolving. In this instance, at the speed of technology. Before end-users can reasonably be expected to interpret and apply predictive analytics, they must first develop a foundation of understanding for what they are looking at and where it came from. Part I of “Big Data, Analytics and the Workplace” aims to provide this baseline. Parts II and III will discuss some of the circumstances under which human resource professionals and other employees tasked with managing a workforce can and should be leveraging this fountain of invaluable information, as well as the accompanying legal considerations.
In this episode, Brent Cossrow and Dave Walton continue to unpack the Van Buren v. United States Supreme Court ruling and the new “gates up or down” era of data protection it has unleashed. Part II focuses on even more recent cases that have discussed the Court’s decision in Van Buren, which is less than 60-days old. The ruling in Van Buren stands to impact millions of Americans and their rights with respect to personal devices, employer-owned devices and the data both contain. As litigation progresses around the country, expect to see more rulings to lean on the Van Buren decision. And keep listening to better understand how, as employers, you should interpret and respond to the changing landscape of data protection.
Click here to listen to the first installment of this episode: The Post-Van Buren Workplace and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, Part I
In June 2021, the Supreme Court ruled in Van Buren v. United States that one "exceeds authorized access" by accessing off-limit files and other information on a computer system they were otherwise authorized to access, effectively narrowing the applicability of the CFAA in prosecuting cybersecurity and computer crime. The ruling also marks the start of a “gates up or down” era for employers seeking to protect workplace computers and electronically stored information. In this podcast, Brent Cossrow and Dave Walton, partners in the Philadelphia office of Fisher Phillips and its Employee Defection and Trade Secrets practice group, unpack this new era of data protection and its far-reaching implications for employers.
On Friday July 9, 2021, President Biden signed a much-anticipated Executive Order on Promoting Competition in the American Economy. The Order is ambitious in spirit, but its true impact on employers seems to depend on exactly how the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) interprets and applies its mandate. In this podcast, Brent Cossrow and Dave Walton, partners in the Philadelphia office of Fisher Phillips and its Employee Defection and Trade Secrets practice group, sit down to discuss their initial reactions, including questions of how the FTC projects to respond, whether the Order creates a private right of action, and how the Order might eventually be used in civil litigation.
How to roll out an updated and compliant mask policy is on every employer’s mind right now, especially as vaccination status plays such a key role in your decisions. This podcast, with co-leader of the Firm’s Vaccine Subcommittee, Kevin Troutman, will discuss best practices from distinguishing vaccinated employees and non-vaccinated employees, the ADA and EEOC considerations, and how firm clients are managing this new workplace hurdle.
In this podcast, Fisher Phillips partner and co-leader of the Firm’s Vaccine Subcommittee, Kevin Troutman, returns to chat with Travis Vance about the ins and outs of the new CDC mask guidance for vaccinated workers and how employers can navigate this very fluid field. The discussion touches on updated OSHA considerations that remain paramount during this turbulent time.
The success of your organization depends on effective management of remote workers. Are your remote workers visible, or invisible? Is the connection between the management of your organization and the invisible workforce best characterized as “remote,” in the sense that management does not know whether the workers are productive? Or are hurting? Or are organizing a union? Or are planning to leave? If these questions are on your mind, join us for this 15-minute podcast.
This legal alert was published on January 22nd, 2021 by Micah Dickie in Atlanta.
President Joe Biden has signed several Executive Orders in the first two days of his presidency, and one is an Executive Order on Protecting Worker Health and Safety that directs the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to increase enforcement of existing agency standards and investigate whether a new standard for COVID-19 mitigation is needed. Given that President Biden has nominated Boston Mayor Marty Walsh to be the next Secretary of Labor – the first union member to fill this role in nearly 50 years and soon to be in charge of the agency that oversees OSHA – employers should be aware of the key provisions of this executive order ahead of an increase in inspections. Here is what employers need to know.
This legal alert was published on January 7th, 2021 by Randall Coffey in Kansas City, Benjamin Ebbink in Sacramento, Richard Meneghello in Portland, and John Polson in Irvine.
The Labor Department finalized a new rule today that aims to make it easier for businesses to classify workers as independent contractors – but the rule faces a very uncertain future given that the Biden administration will take the reins of the federal government before it is scheduled to take effect and the incoming administration has signaled its opposition to this change. Businesses that use independent contractors to carry out critical work roles – especially gig economy companies and those using gig-economy-like strategies for components of their workforce – have long awaited this rule in the hopes that it would lend certainty to modern business models and reduce litigation brought by workers claiming to be misclassified as employees. But celebrations need to be put on hold for now, as we expect President-elect Biden to at least temporarily stall implementation past its planned March 8 effective date while worker advocacy groups and state attorneys general line up to file legal challenges in the hopes of permanently killing the rule.
In this podcast, Fisher Phillips partner Kevin Troutman returns to chat with Travis Vance about employee incentive programs related to the COVID-19 vaccine. The co-leader of our firm’s Vaccine Subcommittee spends some time discussing employee wellness program and what employers can and cannot do to provide incentives for employees to get the COVID-19 vaccine.
The vast majority of employers are not considering mandating their employees receive the COVID-19 vaccine, instead choosing to encourage the shot – but a significant number of businesses remain confused and uncertain on whether and how to incentivize their workers to get inoculated. That’s according to a recent survey conducted by Fisher Phillips, with 700 respondents providing their thoughts between January 26-29. Fisher Phillips partner Kevin Troutman provides a quick review of these survey results and also sheds light on the thinking of other businesses when it comes to this specific challenge.
Conversations about COVID-19 with Fisher Phillips
Moderator: Travis Vance
Join Travis Vance, co-chair of the firm’s Workplace Safety and Catastrophe Management Practice Group and a leader of the firm’s COVID-19 Task Force, as he connects with thought leaders from around the firm to discuss timely issues related to the pandemic’s impact on the workplace.
In this podcast, Fisher Phillips partners Phil Bauknight and Kevin Troutman return to chat with Travis Vance about potential employer liabilities related to workplace COVID-19 vaccination programs. The two leaders of our firm’s Vaccine Subcommittee spend some time discussing whether waivers are an effective tool for employers and other best practices related to these thorny issues.
Conversations about COVID-19 with Fisher Phillips
Moderator: Travis Vance
Join Travis Vance, co-chair of the firm’s Workplace Safety and Catastrophe Management Practice Group and a leader of the firm’s COVID-19 Task Force, as he connects with thought leaders from around the firm to discuss timely issues related to the pandemic’s impact on the workplace.
It’s the topic every employer across the country wants to know about: COVID-19 vaccines and the workplace. In this podcast, Fisher Phillips partners Phil Bauknight and Kevin Troutman – who have been leading our firm’s Vaccine Subcommittee – discuss key issues that employers should consider surrounding the COVID-19 vaccination effort. Among their topics: whether and how to implement a mandatory vaccination program, dealing with reasonable accommodations, alternatives to a mandatory vaccine requirement, and other common questions.
Conversations about COVID-19 with Fisher Phillips
Moderator: Travis Vance
Join Travis Vance, co-chair of the firm’s Workplace Safety and Catastrophe Management Practice Group and a leader of the firm’s COVID-19 Task Force, as he connects with thought leaders from around the firm to discuss timely issues related to the pandemic’s impact on the workplace.
It’s often said that doing business in California is like doing business in an entirely different country, and the state’s response to the pandemic is no exception to this rule. In this podcast, California attorneys Ben Ebbink and Hannah Sweiss discuss the most pressing issues they have seen from clients and California employers related to COVID-19. They will discuss questions about international travel, employers’ new obligations, and recent legislation affecting California employers from a federal, state, and local level.
Conversations about COVID-19 with Fisher Phillips
Moderator: Travis Vance
Join Travis Vance, co-chair of the firm’s Workplace Safety and Catastrophe Management Practice Group and a leader of the firm’s COVID-19 Task Force, as he connects with thought leaders from around the firm to discuss timely issues related to the pandemic’s impact on the workplace.
In this podcast, California attorneys Ben Ebbink and Hannah Sweiss discuss COVID-19 issues in the California workplace, specifically the details of a dramatic new state statute (AB865) that imposes incredible new notification requirements – among other things – on California employers. The new law, in effect as of January 1, 2021, completely redefines what an employer must do when there is a COVID-19 case in a California workplace. It is a must-listen for any organization with a presence in California.
This legal alert was published on December 3, 2020 by Benjamin Morrell and Travis Vance in Charlotte.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention just issued new guidance stating that coronavirus quarantines may be shortened to seven or 10 days under certain circumstances, down from the 14 days currently recommended, according to media reports. This will permit businesses to return employees who have been exposed to COVID-19 back to work on a reduced timeframe. What do employers need to know about this encouraging development?
This newsletter article was published on December 29th, 2020 by Emily Litzinger in Louisville.
Undoubtedly, working mothers have always worked a “double shift” – a full day at work followed by hours spent caring for their children, running to soccer practice, and getting food on the table. Before the pandemic, however, working mothers at least had a network of support including childcare and school to make this challenge possible. But once COVID-19 hit, childcare became scarce, virtual school continued indefinitely, and the months blurred together. The pressure mounted to such unrealistic levels that working mothers began to leave the workforce at a shocking rate. This article will take a closer look on the unique problems faced by working mothers during the pandemic, and will offer six tangible solutions that employers can put into place to support these valuable team members at their workplaces.
This legal alert was published on November 17th, 2020 by J. Randall Coffey in Kansas City, and Richard Meneghello in Portland.
The federal agency charged with enforcing the nation’s main workplace discrimination laws just announced that it recovered over $535 million from employers on behalf of aggrieved workers and applicants this past fiscal year, a figure that shattered the previous record and set an all-time high. The EEOC’s November 16 financial report also touted successes in clearing old inventory of charges, increasing the percentage of resolutions achieved in favor of charging parties, and mediating thousands of charges to conclusion. The report further indicated that the EEOC filed the second-lowest number of merits lawsuits against employers in over two decades. What are the top five takeaways for employers from this latest report?
This newsletter article was published on November 30th, 2020 by Kristin White in Denver.
When the pandemic first began, most employees were ready to pitch in and do their part to help reduce the spread of COVID-19. They adapted to remote working while attending to their children. Others understood they were deemed “essential workers” and adjusted to the new normal when coming to work, which included temperature checks, symptom sign-offs, masks, and social distancing. But after months of being team players, we are all ready for the game to end. Many of your employees are feeling “COVID fatigue” just as we see COVID-19 exposure numbers increasing once again. Here are our top five suggestions for ways to keep your employees masked and socially distanced as we play through these final and extra innings.
This newsletter article was published on October 30th, 2020 by Ashby Angell, Chantell Foley, and Todd Logsdon in Louisville.
When thinking about safety training for your workforce, you may be, understandably, focused on your workforce as a whole. Just as important, however, is considering the age, gender, nationality, and other aspects of all of your employees in planning for such training. America’s workforce is more diverse than ever, and this diversity can impact the way employees comprehend and implement their training.
The last census revealed that approximately 17% of the U.S. workforce is currently made up of foreign-born workers, and the Bureau of Labor Statistics projects that minorities, including foreign-born workers, will approach 50% of the American workforce by the year 2050. The BLS also reported in 2016 that women comprised 47% of the total workforce, and younger workers (those ages 15-24) represented 14% of the workforce. As America's workforce continues to evolve, so will yours – and your safety training should evolve in turn.
This legal alert was published on October 22, 2020 by Nicholas Hulse and Travis Vance in Charlotte.
New COVID-19 contact tracing procedures released by the federal government yesterday have expanded the category of individuals who are deemed to be in close contact with each other – and will complicate the already difficult task faced by employers when trying to maintain a safe workplace environment. The updated guidance now indicates that workers should be considered to be at risk of contracting the novel coronavirus if they were within six feet of an infected individual for a total of 15 minutes or more over a 24-hour period during the 48 hours before the infected individual exhibited symptoms or, if asymptomatic, 48 hours before the COVID-19 test was administered, even if the interactions that lead to a cumulative total of 15 minutes were brief and spread out over that time. What do employers need to know about this new standard, and more importantly what do you need to change about your workplace practices?
This newsletter article was published on September 4, 2020 by Megan Janes in Fort Lauderdale and Jennifer Sandberg in Atlanta.
What a year! 2020 has been full of challenges, both personal and professional. Personally, each of us have our own story. Professionally, workplaces have been rocked with unprecedented turmoil as we navigate COVID-19 and the lasting impact of the social justice protest movement. And now, we will close out 2020 with a contentious presidential election.
A pandemic, racial tensions, concerns about inaccurate news, fears of election fraud, and the potential for high stakes espionage may make workplace issues seem trivial – but just wait until it’s your workplace, regardless of whether you are an employee, manager, or senior leadership. You should anticipate election-related workplace issues regardless of whether your workplace remains virtual, never closed, or falls somewhere in between.
As we count down to the election (less than 60 days to go!) and then the inauguration (a little more than four months to go!), we all have some listening to do. Why listen? Because it may turn out that you are wrong. This article will cover some common misconceptions and provide some legal standards to keep in mind. It then offers a 10-point action plan to proactively avoid problems and respond to them if they arise. The article concludes with information about an interactive workshop that may be of value in helping you address specific issues of tension in your workplace.
This legal alert was published on September 16, 2020 by Phillip Bauknight in New Jersey.
A recent report from the federal government revealing that workplace safety whistleblower claims have exponentially increased during the pandemic should give all employers pause – and should motivate you to take immediate steps to ensure you don’t find yourself on the receiving end of such a claim. What do you need to know about this dramatic rise and what can you do about it?
This legal alert was published on August 18th 2020 by Kevin Troutman in Houston.
As the flu season approaches and the COVID-19 pandemic continues, employers’ mandatory vaccination policies may soon become more important than ever. For several reasons, those policies will also attract unprecedented scrutiny. First, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) has stated that getting the flu vaccine this fall will be all the more important, both to reduce health risks for individuals and to conserve the country’s potentially scarce healthcare resources, particularly for respiratory conditions like the flu and COVID-19. Second, one or more COVID-19 vaccines are expected to become available later this year or in early 2021, offering possible protection from this worldwide scourge. Third, mandatory vaccination policies sometimes spark deeply personal responses at a time when political differences and social justice issues remain at the forefront of the nation’s consciousness.
As employers seek to balance their duty to maintain a workplace free of recognized dangers and the rights of individual employees, questions abound: Can you enforce mandatory vaccination policies? (In most cases, the answer is “yes,” as discussed below.) If you mandate flu shots or COVID-19 vaccinations, what specific risks and responsibilities must you consider and address? And finally, is a mandatory vaccination policy the right option for your company? As usual, the answers to these critical questions lie in the details. This article will provide you an outline of issues to consider as you answer these questions, along with some recommended best practices guidance to lead you through these unprecedented times.
This legal alert was published on August 17th, 2020 by Travis W. Vance in Charlotte.
Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has issued constantly changing guidance for employers that many view as complex, confusing, and impractical. In its perplexing web of guidelines, the CDC recommends that your company take several actions to protect workers from contracting COVID-19, like self-isolating sick employees, quarantining exposed employees, screening employees for symptoms prior to work, and installing partitions to protect public-facing employees.
Given their complexity, some of these directives are often not fully understood by companies. Further complicating matters, many of the recommendations have never been previously undertaken by employers, leading to misapplication. Worst of all, other guidelines are simply not feasible for some employers, leaving them with the tough decision of not following the CDC directive in order to stay in business.
Unfortunately, ignoring or misunderstanding these confusing guidelines, like the four commonly misinterpreted guidance listed below, could lead to legal risks for your company.
This legal alert was published on July 7, 2020 by Hannah Sweiss (Woodland Hills, Los Angeles).
Though many experts thought the summer months would bring reprieve, COVID-19 cases are continuing to rise in the United States and, as a result, more employers are dealing with employees testing positive for the coronavirus. Since we published our original plan for responding COVID-19 cases when businesses began to reopen in April, updated guidance has provided some additional considerations employers should keep in mind as they address a positive coronavirus case. Here is our quick seven-step guide to addressing a positive COVID-19 case in the workplace.
This legal alert was published on July 16, 2020 by:
- Myra Creighton (Atlanta)
- Aymara Ledezma (Los Angelas)
- Todd Logsdon (Louiville)
- Richard Meneghello (Portland)
- Catharine Morisset (Seattle)
- Andria Ryan (Atlanta)
As an increasing number of businesses begin to require face coverings in their facilities – whether as a result of a local legal mandate or in the interest of public safety – there has been a corresponding increase in the number of well-publicized reports of customers and guests reacting in a belligerent, hostile, or even violent manner after being asked to comply with mask rules. What should your business do to minimize the chances of such an incident occurring in your workplace, and what should you do if an anti-mask guest disrupts your business? Here is a five-step plan to address this unfortunate part of our new reality.
This legal alert was published on June 18, 2020 by Jessica T. Cook, Shanon R. Stevenson, and Cynthia J. Yarbrough in Atlanta.
By a 5-4 vote, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on June 18th, the Trump administration did not provide adequate and appropriate justification to terminate the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, preserving the ability of approximately 700,000 individuals – sometimes known as “Dreamers” – to remain in the country and in American workforces. Considering the June 18th decision, many DACA recipients will be able to apply to continue to extend their employment authorization or pursue additional educational opportunities.
This legal alert was published on June 15th, 2020 by J. Randall Coffey in Kansas City, David Klass in Charlotte, Megan Walker in San Diego, and Sarah Weiseltheir in New York and New Jersey.
In a 6-to-3 vote on June 15th, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that workplace discrimination because of an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity — including being transgender — is unlawful discrimination “because of sex” under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The basis for the Court’s ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County was summarized by Justice Gorsuch in his majority opinion: “An individual’s homosexuality or transgender status is not relevant to employment decisions. That’s because it is impossible to discriminate against a person for being homosexual or transgender without discriminating against that individual based on sex.” What do employers need to know about this historic decision?
This legal alert was published on May 26th, 2020 by Travis W. Vance in Charlotte.
Perhaps the most challenging aspect of encountering a suspected or confirmed case of COVID-19 among your employees as you reopen your business is identifying those employees who worked near the infected worker – and thus must also be quarantined. Luckily, there is a simple numerical sequence you can remember that will enable you to follow the CDC contact tracing guidelines for general businesses: 6-15-48. You will need infected employees to identify others who worked within 6 feet of them, for 15 minutes or more, within the 48 hours prior to the sick individual showing symptoms, or later.
This legal alert was posted on March 26th 2020 by Matthew R Korn and Sheila M Willis in Columbia.
As more and more businesses plan their re-openings heading into the summer months, many employers are trying to determine how to handle employee requests for leave under the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA) based on the unavailability of child care. Specifically, once schools are closed for summer vacation, do employees continue to qualify for paid leave benefits under FFCRA?
This legal alert was posted on May 26th, 2020 by Benjamin J Ross in Denver and Samantha Saltzman in Irvine.
With employees returning to work and companies reopening their doors to customers, employers are looking for ways to limit liability related to potential COVID-19 cases contracted in the workplace. To do so, many are considering waivers for not only their employees, but also for customers. Such waivers, however, are somewhat limited in their effectiveness and employers should consider the pros and cons before attempting to implement them. You may also want to consider an alternate strategy that may offer you some of the assurances you seek without many of the negatives associated with waivers.
This legal alert was posted on April 24th, 2020 by Risa B. Boerner (CIPP/US) and Luke E. McDaniels in Philadelphia.
The COVID-19 pandemic has caused many employers now operating remotely to conduct meetings via video conference – which has created a whole new set of various privacy and cybersecurity concerns. While these remote work tools have facilitated a more personal connection and interactive experience, their use is fraught with privacy concerns you may never have before considered. If your organization is weighing its options or unaware of the risks these services may create, this article provides a 10-point plan to protect your personal and confidential information and ensure you remain compliant with various federal and state privacy laws.
This legal alert was posted on April 20, 2020 by Nicholas S. Hulse in Charlotte.
The Centers for Disease Controls and Prevention (CDC) just released guidance to assist employers in making decisions regarding reopening during the COVID-19 pandemic. Besides continuing to follow the recommendations issued by state and local health departments when determining the most appropriate actions to take, you should pay particular attention to these five steps.
This legal alert was posted on April 20, 2020 by Travis W. Vance in Charlotte.
Businesses will soon reopen, presenting employers with new challenges as part of the next phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. With no known vaccine or treatment currently available for the novel coronavirus, reopened employers will likely experience confirmed cases of the illness in their workplace. Now is the time to develop plans to address this inevitable situation.
This legal alert was published on March 18, 2020 by Shayna Balch (Phoenix/Los Angeles).
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission just weighed in on the impact that the COVID-19 coronavirus is having on American workforces and issued a press release today titled “What You Should Know About the ADA, the Rehabilitation Act, and COVID-19.” The publication takes a Q&A format and tackles some common areas of concern for employers.
This legal alert was published on March 29, 2020 by Steven Bernstein (Tampa), Benjamin Ebbink (Sacramento), Samantha Monsees (Kansas City), Samantha Saltzman (Irvine), and J. Hagood Tighe (Columbia).
The Department of Labor (DOL) continues to update its guidance document on implementation of the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA), and the latest update caught many employers by surprise. The updated document released by the agency appears to suggest that employees who cannot work because their businesses are subject to a government shutdown order or they are ordered to shelter at home will not qualify for Emergency Paid Sick Leave or Emergency FMLA. This clarification should now be integrated into employers’ plans for developing best practices and compliance tools to deal with the rapidly changing situation.
This article was originally published in the March 2020 issue of the “On the Front Lines” newsletter by Erin Price in Sacramento.
With the rising cost of child care, and the fact that both parents are employed in more than half of two-parent families, the option for employers to allow employees to bring their infant children with them to work is becoming increasingly popular. This article looks at the pros and cons of such an arrangement and discusses what kinds of policies and procedures can help set expectations and maximize benefits.
This article was originally published in the March 2020 issue of the “On the Front Lines” newsletter by April Perkins in Sacramento.
It looks at the four-day work week, examining some of its potential benefits (such as employee retention, increased productivity, decreased operational costs, and reduced greenhouse gas emissions) and its potential downsides (including unpredictable outcomes and conflicting or rigid compensation laws).
This legal alert was published on January 13th, 2020 by Marty Heller in Atlanta, Richard Meneghello in Portland, and John Polson in Irvine.
The U.S. Department of Labor just finalized its rule that attempts to limit the scope of joint employment liability for wage and hour matters. Although much remains to be seen, this rule may usher in a new era, and could lead to fewer businesses being found to be joint employers by a court or agency when it comes to minimum wage, overtime, and other similar liability under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). However, many questions still remain about various aspects of this rule, particularly how courts will apply the test’s four factors as well as the alternative “catch-all” test. You should now reexamine your business models to capitalize on the new standard, which should take effect on or about March 16, 2020.
This article was originally published in the February issue of the “On the Front Lines” newsletter by Annie Lau and Anthony E. Guzman II in San Francisco.
The assault on arbitration is old news. Recently, however, courts and commentators alike have seemed to stake out a new area for contest in the ongoing back and forth debate about this valuable litigation alternative: confidentiality clauses. For decades, confidentiality clauses have been a staple of most arbitration agreements, as well as most contracts. So as proponents of excluding confidentiality clauses argue that these clauses tend to “silence employees” or “hide wrongdoings” begin to emerge at both the national and state level, we should take care to critically examine these arguments and remember that confidentiality clauses have been the status quo for good reason. This article looks at why these arguments are being made, why there may still be good reason for confidentiality clauses despite these arguments, and how to account for these dueling perspectives in our own practices moving forward.
This article was originally published in the February issue of the “On the Front Lines” newsletter by Travis Vance in Charlotte.
Employee safety has always been important, but the recent public shaming of allegedly hazardous workplaces reveals that the public’s disdain for companies that provide unsafe environments for their employees is increasing. No longer can you ignore the public cries to eliminate or minimize occupational hazards, as you risk becoming the latest public face of what has essentially become the “Empowerment Era” – a time when people from all walks of life not only feel emboldened to expose “bad players” but now have the digital means by which to amplify and give power to their voices. This article looks at the different stages of the Empowerment Era – starting with the Fight for $15, followed by the #MeToo movement, and finally the #WorkSafe movement, and what employers can do to be prepared.
Part IV includes California Law, Employee Benefits, & Supreme Court
When the calendar turned to January 1, we not only saw the dawn of a new year but the beginning of a new decade. It’s natural, at such a turning point, to spend some time looking back on what has transpired in the past 10 years before turning our attention to the years to come. And we’ve done just that in the area we know best: labor and employment law.
We’ve assembled some of our firm’s thought leaders to spend some time recapping the most significant events in workplace law from the 2010’s, while also forecasting where we might see things heading in the decade to come.
Part III includes Immigration, International Law, & Workplace Privacy
When the calendar turned to January 1, we not only saw the dawn of a new year but the beginning of a new decade. It’s natural, at such a turning point, to spend some time looking back on what has transpired in the past 10 years before turning our attention to the years to come. And we’ve done just that in the area we know best: labor and employment law.
We’ve assembled some of our firm’s thought leaders to spend some time recapping the most significant events in workplace law from the 2010’s, while also forecasting where we might see things heading in the decade to come.
Part II includes Labor Relations, Wage and Hour, Workplace Safety, & Joint Employment
When the calendar turned to January 1, we not only saw the dawn of a new year but the beginning of a new decade. It’s natural, at such a turning point, to spend some time looking back on what has transpired in the past 10 years before turning our attention to the years to come. And we’ve done just that in the area we know best: labor and employment law.
We’ve assembled some of our firm’s thought leaders to spend some time recapping the most significant events in workplace law from the 2010’s, while also forecasting where we might see things heading in the decade to come.
Part I includes #MeToo, EEO Law, Pay Equity, & Affirmative Action
When the calendar turned to January 1, we not only saw the dawn of a new year but the beginning of a new decade. It’s natural, at such a turning point, to spend some time looking back on what has transpired in the past 10 years before turning our attention to the years to come. And we’ve done just that in the area we know best: labor and employment law.
We’ve assembled some of our firm’s thought leaders to spend some time recapping the most significant events in workplace law from the 2010’s, while also forecasting where we might see things heading in the decade to come.
This article was published by Cheryl Pinarchick on November 11, 2019 in the “Pay Equity Matters: Mind the Gap” blog on fisherphillips.com.
A California federal judge on November 11th granted the U.S. Women’s National Team an early victory in their pay equity battle against the U.S. Soccer Federation (the Federation), granting class certification to a group of players who want to collectively assert their gender-related legal claims. While Judge Gary Klausner’s order is just the first of several hurdles the women’s team will have to overcome in order to successfully challenge the pay structure that they allege favors the men’s team, it is an important milestone in any class action.
This article was published by Rick Grimaldi on November 12, 2019 in the "Gig Employer Blog" on fisherphillips.com.
The Philadelphia city council recently passed the Domestic Worker Bill of Rights, which grants domestic workers benefits such as paid time off. While it is not the initial purpose of this plan, a benefits model where workers carry benefits with them between one job to the next could help gig economy workers nationwide.
This article was published in the December issue of the “On The Front Lines” newsletter by Andrew Hoag and Sarah George.
What happens when a male employee refuses to work with female coworkers because of a religious belief that men and women should avoid one-on-one situations? This article examines a pending case in North Carolina as well as several from the recent past where religious convictions collide with federal anti-discrimination laws. It concludes with three suggestions for your company’s HR department and three for General Counsel.
This article was published in the November edition of the On the Front Lines Newsletter by Micah Dawson in Denver.
With the rise of social media and other review outlets, employers can find themselves exposed to fake or slanderous online postings from former employees. With almost all content platforms having policies stating they will not play arbitrator in defamation disputes, what can employers do to respond to these claims? This article looks at five steps you can take when handling incendiary online reviews.
This article was published in the November edition of the On the Front Lines Newsletter by Cheryl Pinarchick and Jennifer Scully in Boston.
The rise of co-working spaces has presented unique legal issues for companies that utilize these services. Some of the risks include sexual harassment, theft, and other unwanted behavior caused by the absence of policies governing conduct, and the availability of alcoholic beverages at many locations. If you are an owner or operator of one of these spaces, or a company utilizing their services, you can mitigate these risks by setting ground rules, increasing security, and knowing your public accommodation obligations.
This blog post was published on October 21st 2019 by Richard Meneghello in Portland.
California just enacted a new independent contract statute that will soon make it difficult for gig economy businesses and other companies to classify their workers as independent contractors. Now, several other states are considering their own versions. This blog post looks at California’s statute and what it means for businesses, and at what could soon be happening in New York, Illinois, Wisconsin, Oregon, and Washington.
This article was published in the October edition of the On the Front Lines Newsletter By Kathleen McLeod Caminiti in New York and New Jersey, and Sarah Wieselthier in New Jersey.
With the end of the year soon approaching, now is the perfect time to evaluate your pay practices and minimize risk for litigation. Many states have pay equity laws that prohibit discrimination in wages on the basis of gender, race, ethnicity, and religion. To ensure that your organization complies with state and federal laws, you can review your compensation policies, award bonuses to level the playing field, and make sure you have a plan outlined for the future.
This article was published in the October edition of the On the Front Lines Newsletter by Megan Walker in San Diego.
As you begin to see more Gen Z workers enter your workforce, what does it mean for your company and your management styles? Gen Z workers tend to value diversity, honesty and transparency, frequent feedback and mentoring, and a company culture that promotes treating their employees like people and providing opportunities for growth. This article takes a closer look at where these values come from, and what you need to know about Gen Z as employees in order to best benefit your workplace.
This legal alert was posted on September 11th 2019, by James Fessenden in San Diego.
It looks at a new California law that would make it much more difficult for businesses to treat workers as independent contractors and hire small businesses, and would grant workers across the state increased pay, benefits, and protections. While there are exceptions that may apply, businesses that do not comply with the new law or misclassify their workers risk significant legal exposure.
This article was published in the September edition of the On the Front Lines Newsletter by Erin Price in Sacramento.
Instead of traditional in-person interviews, some companies are opting for text-based chatting in order to streamline the interview process, cut down on travel costs, and increase candidate engagement. This article looks at the growing trend of conducting interviews through text messages, discusses when texting is an appropriate approach to hiring, and what other benefits employers looking to implement this technology can expect.
This article was published in the September edition of the On the Front Lines Newsletter by Miranda Watkins in San Diego and Sara Zimmerman in Irvine.
It looks at how new monitoring technologies can affect employees and what they might mean for employers. These technologies, such as wristbands that can record the actions of an employee, might be useful for efficiency, but can lead to concerns about disability discrimination, employee morale, privacy, and more. So how can employers benefit from this technology while reducing their legal risks? To quote from this article’s conclusion: “A workplace that incorporates technology with a human approach is likely to strike the right balance between making employees feel valued and streamlining its processes.”
This article was published in the September edition of the On the Front Lines Newsletter by Chantell C. Foley and Todd B. Logsdon in Louisville.
In a memorandum released last year, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (or OSHA) announced that inspectors can now use drones to collect evidence. In order to not be surprised by one of these inspections, it is a good idea to prepare a response strategy just as you would for any other OSHA inspection. You should also know that OSHA cannot initiate a drone inspection without employer consent, and you may be able to limit inspections to exclude the use of a drone. To quote from this article’s conclusion: “You should educate your organization on these new developments to ensure your key personnel at least know enough to prepare for future OSHA drone inspections.”
This article was published in the August edition of On the Front Lines, By Chantell C. Foley and Todd B. Logsdon (Louisville).
It looks at employee burnout, which is now an officially diagnosable condition. While there are no OSHA standards to govern burnout, some studies indicate that burned-out employees have less awareness of their surroundings and struggle to maintain workplace safety practice. To quote from this article’s conclusion: “Creating awareness campaigns and training initiatives to recognize symptoms of employee burnout and the safety hazards caused by fatigue or lack of concentration may save your workplace from injuries and illnesses down the road.”
This Legal Alert was published on July 22, 2019, by Cheryl Behymer (Columbia), Ted Boehm (Atlanta), Edwin Foulke Jr. (Atlanta/D.C.), Christine Howard (Tampa/Atlanta), Todd Lyon (Portland/Seattle), Richard Meneghello (Portland), John Polson (Irvine), Shanon Stevenson (Atlanta), and Travis Vance (Charlotte).
It looks at what Eugene Scalia’s recent appointment as Secretary of Labor means for the business community. Fisher Phillips attorneys predict how he will act regarding Pay Equity And Affirmative Action, Workplace Safety, Wage And Hour Division, Joint Employment, Family And Medical Leave, immigration, and more. Quote: “The consensus opinion? Scalia will aggressively battle against intrusive and overreaching regulations that hamstring the country’s employers, and will quickly endear himself to the business community.”
This legal alert was published on July 15, 2019, by Davis Bae (Seattle), Steven Bernstein (Tampa), Todd Lyon (Portland/Seattle), and Shanon Stevenson (Atlanta).
It looks at how your workplace might be affected by ICE raids or audits and how you can be prepared if one were to take place. If you receive a Notice of Inspection for an audit, contact legal counsel immediately to ensure efficiency and accuracy during the process. If your workplace is the target of a raid, you can manage the situation by staying calm, documenting the actions taken by ICE without interfering with their investigation, and by not giving any statements to ICE agents without first speaking with legal counsel. To be prepared, be sure to stay up-to date with your I-9 compliance programs, and make sure all I-9 forms are present and complete.
This article by Grant Wills (Columbia) was published in the July edition of On The Front Lines.
It looks at the Honest Belief Defense, which can be a valuable tool to employers in a litigation setting if they terminate an employee for misuse of FMLA. In order to build a successful Honest Belief Defense, as well as curb FMLA misuse, employers should detect the abuse, thoroughly investigate the situation, consider 3rd party assistance, and use FMLA protections to the employer’s advantage.
This Legal Alert was posted by Samantha Bononno (Philadelphia), Rick Grimaldi (Philadelphia, Washington D.C. Metro), and Reyburn Lominack III (Columbia) on June 19th, 2019.
It explains how a recent decision may mean that any mandatory arbitration agreements that could be interpreted as preventing employees from filing charges with the National Labor Relations Board are invalid, even if they include general disclaimer language. To quote from this alert’s conclusion, “You should promptly review any arbitration agreements you maintain to determine whether they include broad language that might be read as precluding employees from filing charges with the Board.”
This Legal Alert was posted by Reyburn Lominack III (Columbia) and Phillips McWilliams (Columbia) on June 17th, 2019.
It explains how an employer prohibited union organizers from soliciting in its cafeteria and then won a court case upholding that ban, reversing 37 years of precedent. To quote from this alert’s conclusion, “For those employers who have historically “tolerated” organizing in public areas for fear of violating the law, this new development offers an additional weapon against unwanted activity.”
This legal alert was posted by Jazmyn Stover (Cleveland) on May 16th, 2019.
https://www.fisherphillips.com/resources-alerts-nlrb-advice-memo-could-mean-end-for
This legal alert was posted by Richard Meneghello (Portland) on May 10th, 2019.
https://www.fisherphillips.com/resources-alerts-what-employers-need-to-know-about-the-EEOC
This legal alert was posted by Cheryl Behymer (Columbia) on May 3rd, 2019.
https://www.fisherphillips.com/resources-alerts-double-duty-you-will-soon-have-to
On The Front Lines
- 00:16 - Best Privacy Practices for Employer-Issued Fitness Trackers - By Lariza Hebert (Houston)
- 08:50 - The ABCs of CBD for Employers - By Howard Mavity (Atlanta)
- 17:41 - The Trend to Toss Arbitration: Is The Practice Past Its Prime? - By Anthony E. Guzman II (San Francisco)
Healthcare Update
- 25:44 - 12-Step Plan To Help Navigate OSHA's Continued Focus On Workplace Violence - By Pamela Williams (Houston)
- 30:45 - Workplace Violence Can Lead To General Duty Clause Violations - By Megan R. U'Sellis (Louisville)
Dealership Update
- 37:51 - USDOL Issues Proposed New Overtime Rule, Likely To Go Into Effect This Time - By Joseph W. Ambash and Jeffrey A. Fritz (Boston)
- 43:28 - How To Build A Respectful Workplace In Your Dealership - By D. Albert Brannen (Atlanta)