Labor & Employment Developments Blog

On April 22, 2026, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking aimed at clarifying when multiple entities may be considered “joint employers” under federal wage and hour laws. If finalized, the rule would create a single, more uniform standard under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and align that analysis with the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act (MSPA), marking a significant step toward consistency across these statutes.

Many employers include mandatory arbitration agreements as a standard part of onboarding, expecting that workplace disputes will be resolved outside of court.  A recent decision from the Sixth Circuit, however, underscores an important—and expansive—limitation on those agreements when sexual harassment is alleged.

Most employers understand that unfair labor practices during a union organizing campaign carry significant legal consequences. In recent years, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) had ordered employers who engaged in unfair labor practices to bargain with a union regardless of whether the union won the election. In a decision issued on March 6, 2026, the Sixth Circuit (covering Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee) limited the NLRB’s ability issue such bargaining orders, rejecting the NLRB’s recently announced Cemex framework for ordering employers to recognize and bargain with unions.

Federal labor and employment standards continue to shift as agencies revisit rules issued over the past several years. For HR professionals, staying current on these developments is critical to managing compliance risk and workforce strategy.

Doing business in California has always been a daunting task for employers because of California’s onerous regulations for employers. Now that we are nearly two months into 2026, it is important to ensure you are complying with the most recent regulations.

On February 11, 2026, the EEOC released guidance addressing telework as a reasonable accommodation under the Rehabilitation Act and Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), providing a framework for employers managing return-to-office requests. The guidance clarifies that telework may be required as a reasonable accommodation when it is necessary for an employee to perform the essential functions of the position or to access equal employment opportunities and benefits. It further explains that telework is not required where the essential functions must be performed on-site or where the request is based solely on preference or on general symptom management. The guidance also affirms employers may re-evaluate and modify or discontinue previously approved telework arrangements through the interactive process.

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has voted to rescind its anti-harassment guidance that previously stated misgendering employees could constitute unlawful discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The decision marks a significant rollback of Biden-era workplace protections for LGBTQ+ employees and continues a broader shift in federal enforcement priorities under the second Trump administration.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has eliminated any remaining uncertainty about its 2026 enforcement priorities regarding diversity, equity, and inclusion programs. In a December 18, 2025 interview with Reuters, EEOC Chair Andrea Lucas emphasized the EEOC’s position that workplace initiatives using race, sex, or other protected characteristics as “motivating factors” in employment decisions are unlawful under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. Chair Lucas also clearly signaled that employers maintaining such initiatives can expect to be subject to investigations, enforcement actions, and litigation throughout 2026. This announcement is in furtherance of executive orders issued by President Trump and guidance released by the EEOC and the Department of Justice (DOJ) in 2025, which effectively outlawed the majority of DEI programs.

The United States Department of Labor (DOL) has resolved a long-standing and frequently litigated issue under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA): whether intermittent FMLA leave includes time spent traveling to and from approved medical appointments. In a January 2026 opinion letter, the DOL confirmed that such travel time is FMLA-protected. 

As the new year begins, employers once again face a shifting labor and employment legal landscape. With Congress continuing to delay adoption of a comprehensive federal paid family and medical leave framework, states and local governments have accelerated their own efforts. In 2026, several state-mandated paid leave laws will take effect for the first time, while others will expand in scope, duration, or eligibility. For employers, particularly those operating in multiple jurisdictions, these developments increase compliance obligations, administrative complexity, and litigation risk.