SimplyHR | Employment & Labor Blog 

Subscribe

Blog Editors

Topics

Archives

Posts in Court Rulings.
By Dennis Collins, Lauren Harris on June 29, 2018 at 11:40 AM

U.S. Supreme Court BuildingThe U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion June 27 in Janus v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council 31, 585 U.S. ___ (2018), holding that nonunion members working in union positions for public employers are not obligated to pay agency fees, also known as “fair share” fees. This overturns Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, 431 U.S. 209 (1977) which set the precedent that as long as the agency fees represent the percentage of the union’s expenditures for collective bargaining, contract administration, and grievance adjustment purposes, then state governments can legislate that public employees employed in positions represented by unions, even though not union members, can be required to pay service charges or agency fees. In conjunction, unions are required to provide detailed notices of how the agency fees are being spent for “chargeable” activities (contract and bargaining based activities) and “non-chargeable” activities (political and lobbying activities). It should be noted that federal law prohibits unions that bargain for federal workers to charge agency fees to nonunion members, but according to the U.S. Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics, about 27 percent of the federal workforce are union members.

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Google+ Email
By Lauren Harris, T. Christopher Bailey on June 7, 2018 at 2:50 PM

Person decorating a white wedding cakeOn June 4, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court released its long-awaited decision in Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, 584 U.S. ___ (2018), which examined whether a Colorado bakery violated that state’s Anti-Discrimination Act by refusing to bake a wedding cake celebrating a same-sex marriage ceremony. While a 7-2 majority of the court sided with the bakery, the much-anticipated decision left more questions unanswered than answered. The decision and concurring and dissenting opinions can be read here.

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Google+ Email
By Jill Luft on April 12, 2018 at 9:50 AM

Words "Out of Office" written on a piece of paper held up by a businesswomanAs we reported last fall, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals determined that a multi-month continuous leave of absence is beyond the scope of a reasonable accommodation under the ADA. The case was Severson v. Heartland Woodcraft, Inc., 872 F.3d 476 (7th Cir. 2017). After exhausting 12 continuous weeks of FMLA leave for a serious back condition, Severson informed his employer that he would need to remain off work for another two to three months. The Seventh Circuit reasoned that the ADA is an antidiscrimination statute, not a medical leave entitlement, and an employee who needs long-term medical leave cannot work and is therefore not a qualified individual under the ADA.

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Google+ Email
By Katherine Fechte on April 4, 2018 at 9:50 AM

Person receiving car keys from a car salesmanOn April 2, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a close 5-4 decision, held that car dealership service advisors are exempt from the overtime requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). In reaching this conclusion, the court rejected the long-held belief that FLSA exemptions should be applied narrowly.

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Google+ Email
By Lauren Daming on February 27, 2018 at 1:54 PM

Word "confidential" written on shredded paperA National Labor Relations Board administrative law judge in February struck down two provisions in a severance agreement relating to confidentiality and participation in third-party claims. In Baylor University Medical Center, the administrative law judge (ALJ) concluded that these provisions violated the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) because they had the effect of restricting protected conduct and were not justified by any countervailing concerns. The ALJ relied on the board’s recent Boeing Company decision that outlined a new framework for reviewing employer policies.

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Google+ Email
By Audrie Howard, Katherine Fechte, Lauren Daming, Lauren Harris, Camille Toney on February 8, 2018 at 2:50 PM

"2017" and "2018" written on metal wheelsThe federal employment law landscape saw some interesting developments in 2017, as well as some anticipated changes that were ultimately halted or delayed. Below is a summary of major federal employment law headlines and a look at what employers can expect in 2018.

For Missouri and Illinois employers specifically, a review of 2017 updates and a look forward at 2018 can be found here.

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Google+ Email
By Amy Blaisdell, Audrie Howard, Jill Luft on November 10, 2017 at 10:52 AM

"ADA, Americans with Disabilities Act" written on a piece of paper with a pencil and stethoscope on top.A recent Seventh Circuit case held that additional leave beyond what is otherwise required by leave entitlement laws is not a reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act. This holding provides important guidance for employers. Continue reading for the details of this case and our recommended best practices in light of its holding.

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Google+ Email
By Lauren Daming on September 1, 2017 at 11:40 AM

Word "Overtime" written in white text with a red backrgoundA Texas district court judge struck down the Obama administration’s overtime rule on Aug. 31, 2017, finding that the Department of Labor (DOL) had exceeded its authority in adopting a new salary threshold that would have entitled an estimated 4.2 million workers to overtime compensation.

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Google+ Email
By Lauren Daming on April 13, 2017 at 1:30 PM

Hands protecting group of cardboard cut-out figuresIn late March, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit revived a lawsuit brought against Home Depot by the mother of a pregnant employee who was killed by her supervisor at a non-work event. Reversing the district court’s decision to dismiss the lawsuit as not stating a viable claim under Illinois law, the Court of Appeals found that Home Depot had a duty to protect its employees from the criminal acts of the supervisor, a known sexual harasser.

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Google+ Email
By Camille Toney on April 5, 2017 at 12:53 PM

Two arrows facing the left and one arrow facing the left.In a landmark decision released April 4, 2017, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Title VII protection extends to sexual orientation. The Seventh Circuit has become the first appeals court to rule in such a manner, directly contradicting the recent decisions of the Eleventh and Second Circuits.

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Google+ Email