Posts

September Updates

APPLIES TO

Varies

EFFECTIVE

Varies

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

This Short List addresses the following topics:
  1. REMINDER! EEO-1 Component 2 Reporting is Due September 30th
  2. DOL Says DOT Drivers Sleeping in Berths While Off-Duty is Unpaid Time
  3. 2nd Circuit: Collectively Bargained Arbitration is Governed by the Scope of the Agreement
  4. 9th Circuit: The Dynamex Independent Contractor Test Does Not Apply Retroactively – For Now
  5. New Noncompete Restrictions in Maine, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island
  6. Arizona: Mini-COBRA and Bona Fide Associations Updates
  7. California: Hairstyles Soon to Be Protected From Discrimination
  8. Emeryville, CA: Small Independent Restaurant Minimum Wage Hold Repealed
  9. Florida: Unemployment Compensation Protections for Domestic Violence Victims
  10. Indiana: Direct Sellers are Exempt from Minimum Wage Rules
  11. Iowa: Enacts Negligent Hiring Protections for Employers
  12. Louisiana: Electronic Notice to Employees Permitted for Group Health Insurance Plans
  13. Kansas City, MO: Enacts Salary History Inquiry Ban
  14. New Hampshire: Child Labor Hours Restricted
  15. New York: Paid Family Leave Benefit Schedule Update
  16. New York: Whistleblower’s Immigration Status is Protected
  17. Ohio: Motor Carrier Drivers Excluded from Definition of “Employee”
  18. Pittsburgh, PA: Paid Sick Leave is Revived by State Supreme Court
  19. Vermont: Expunged Records Make Criminal Convictions Vanish
  20. Virginia: Updates to Minimum Wage Exemptions and Nondisclosure Agreements
  21. West Virginia: Effect of Expunged Criminal Convictions

Read more

Eleventh Circuit: Discrimination Defined When Compared to Similar Employees

APPLIES TO

All Employers with AL, FL, GA employees

EFFECTIVE

March 21, 2019

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

When making a discrimination claim under federal law, an employee must show she was treated differently than a “similarly situated” individual. In Lewis v. Union City, the Eleventh Circuit en banc defined what it means to be similarly situated. Specifically, only employees who are “similarly situated in all material respects” may be compared for purposes of finding discrimination. Although the analysis of similarity of “all material respects” will be determined on a case-by-case basis, the court gave “guideposts” of what to consider. For example, such individuals will have (1) engaged in the same basic conduct, (2) been subject to the same employment policy or rule, (3) ordinarily have the same supervisor, and (4) a shared employment or disciplinary history.

Read more

March Updates

APPLIES TO

Varies

EFFECTIVE

Varies

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

This Short List addresses the following topics:
  1. U.S. Supreme Court Reversed Ninth Circuit Equal Pay Ruling Based on Judge’s Death
  2. Fifth Circuit: Restated Its Position that Title VII Does Not Protect Sexual Orientation
  3. California: Guidance on New Agricultural Overtime Pay Requirements
  4. Alameda, CA: City Minimum Wage Increases to $13.50 in July, Regardless of Employer Size
  5. Florida: Miami Beach Minimum Wage Struck Down
  6. Illinois: $9.25 Minimum Wage by January 2020, With New Possible Penalties
  7. Minneapolis, MN: Minimum Wage Increase Approved
  8. New Jersey: $10 Minimum Wage in July 2019, $15 by 2024
  9. Westchester County, New York: Bans the Box
  10. Portland, Oregon: Prohibits Discrimination Against Atheists and Agnostics
  11. West Virginia: Federal Law Enforcement Pension Freed From State Taxes

Read more

Eleventh Circuit: Valet Uniforms May Be “Materials” Requiring FLSA Coverage of Employees

APPLIES TO

Employers with AL, FL, and GA Employees

EFFECTIVE

June 29, 2018

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

In Asalde v. First Class Parking Sys. LLC, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeal stated that a jury may determine whether valet uniforms meet the “materials” definition for “enterprise coverage” which would allow them the protections of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The FLSA applies, in part, to employers who have “employees handling, selling, or otherwise working on goods or materials that have been moved in or produced for [interstate or international] commerce by any person” and have an annual volume of business of at least $500,000. (Emphasis added.)

Florida: Employees May Be Prohibited from Using Employer Referral Sources After Termination

APPLIES TO

All Employers with FL Employees

EFFECTIVE

September 14, 2017

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

In Florida, non-compete agreements are used to protect an employer’s “legitimate business interests.” The Florida Supreme Court recently stated that referral sources may be considered a legitimate business interest. In both White v. Mederi Caretenders Visiting Services of Southeast Florida and Americare Home Therapy, Inc. v. Hiles, the employers hired an individual whose job duties included soliciting health care providers for home health care service referrals.  The employees were required to sign a non-compete agreement that restricted their ability to work for competitors for a year after termination; in both instances, the employers sued when their respective ex-employee went to work for a competitor after their termination.

The Florida Supreme Court identified the crux of both cases as determining whether or not the home health care service referrals qualified as a legitimate business interest.  Ultimately, the court stated that the statute did not specifically preclude a referral source from being recognized as a legitimate business interest.  However, the court cautioned that employers should not consider these cases as a ticket to consider all referral sources as a legitimate business interest.  Instead, courts must analyze the facts of any similar case to determine how critical the referral source is to the business, the nature of the business, and the scope of business’s investment in developing referral relationships.

Action Items

  1. Review restrictive covenants or non-compete agreements with labor counsel to ensure agreements cover all legitimate business interests.
  2. Subscribers can call our HR On-Call Hotline at (888) 378-2456 for further assistance.

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.

© 2017 ManagEase, Incorporated.