|
APPLIES TO All Employers with AK Employees |
EFFECTIVE As indicated |
QUESTIONS? Contact HR On-Call |
The Arkansas state legislature’s 2019 session ended on April 10, 2019 with several changes to employment-related laws. Key points are summarized below. All bills go into effect on July 23, 2019 unless otherwise stated.
|
APPLIES TO Employers with AK, AZ, CA, HI, ID, MT, NV, OR, WA, Guam, and Northern Mariana Islands Employees |
EFFECTIVE July 13, 2018 |
QUESTIONS? Contact HR On-Call |
In Dutta v. State Farm, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal stated that an employee did not have standing to sue a prospective employer for failing to comply with the pre-adverse action notice requirements under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). The FCRA requires employers to give applicants notice before they take any adverse employment action based on the results of a consumer report (e.g., credit report). This requirement is meant to give the applicant an opportunity to contest or correct information in the credit report. After providing such pre-adverse action notice and certain timing requirements are met, an employer may then take the adverse action if it still intends to do so.
|
APPLIES TO All Employers with AK, AZ, CA, HI, ID, MT, NV, OR, and WA Employees |
EFFECTIVE April 26, 2018 |
QUESTIONS? Contact HR On-Call |
According to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, even self-governed tribal land must obey the provisions of the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”). In National Labor Relations Board v. Casino Pauma, the circuit court stated that the casino violated the NLRA by attempting to limit protected union activity.
Under the NLRA, employees have the right to engage in specified protected activities relating to improving or discussing working conditions, free of employer retaliation or adverse action. At Casino Pauma, operated by the Pauma Band of Mission Indians and located on the tribe’s reservation, a number of casino workers began distributing union leaflets to customers entering the casino. The employees were originally removed by security. When they attempted to distribute leaflets some weeks later, the employees were disciplined.
The NLRB filed a complaint on behalf of the employees. An administrative law judge found that the casino violated the NLRA by attempting to interfere with protected union activities, and the circuit court agreed, stating that the NLRA applies to tribal employers.
Disclaimer: This document is designed to provide general information and guidance concerning employment-related issues. It is presented with the understanding that ManagEase is not engaged in rendering any legal opinions. If a legal opinion is needed, please contact the services of your own legal adviser.
© 2018 ManagEase
|
APPLIES TO All Employers with AR, IO, MN, MO, NE, |
EFFECTIVE May 10, 2017 |
QUESTIONS? Contact HR On-Call |
In LaCurtis v. Express Medical Transporters, Inc., the Eighth Circuit determined that the present design and configuration of a vehicle, rather than its original manufacture capacity, determines the vehicle driver’s eligibility for overtime pay through the Motor Carrier Act exemption of the Fair Labor Standards Act.
|
APPLIES TO Employers with Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota Employees |
EFFECTIVE August 4, 2016 |
QUESTIONS? Contact HR On-Call |
Tracking intermittent leaves can be an administrative headache. For one company, “voluntary” overtime compounded that difficulty. In Hernandez v. Bridgestone Americas Tire Operations, LLC (“BATO”), the Eighth Circuit provided guidance on determining when overtime becomes mandatory for the purpose of calculating intermittent FMLA leave benefits.