- Posts by Gregory J. RobinsonAssociate
Greg Robinson’s practice is concentrated in the area of labor and employment law. He has counseled clients on a wide array of employment matters, including wage and hour disputes, discrimination charges, and issues involving ...
As the President and Congress continue to debate the status of a new stimulus bill in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, one question on a lot of employers’ minds is what will happen to the status of the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (“FFCRA”). As discussed previously on this blog, the FFCRA was passed in the early days of the pandemic as employers and employees faced uncertainty over how to respond to transmission of the virus, quarantine orders, and school closures. The FFCRA created two new types of paid benefits—a paid sick leave benefit and a paid emergency Family ...
Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, a new landmark ruling clarifying that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964—which prohibits workplace discrimination—applies to discrimination based upon sexual orientation and gender identity.
Yesterday the Department of Labor announced its first round of published guidance to provide information to employees and employers about how each will be able to take advantage of the protections and relief offered by the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA). This guidance has answered some of the most common questions we have been receiving since the law’s passage last week, but some questions remain as to how the leave will be administered. The Department is expect to announce further guidance as the week progresses.
Yesterday, the federal government passed the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (“FFCRA”) in response to the challenges posed by the current COVID-19 outbreak. The legislation covers several areas, but critical for employers are two new sick leave benefits set to take effect no later than April 2, 2020.
The city of Cincinnati's salary history ban is set to take effect this Friday, March 13, 2020. Passed in 2019 in an effort to address gender and race-based pay discrepancies, the ordinance provided employers with one year to prepare for its implementation.
On March 7th, the Department of Labor revealed its proposal to revise the overtime requirements for workers across the country. The salary threshold at which employees can be eligible for overtime pay was last increased in 2004 during the George W. Bush Administration and set at the current level of $24,000 per year. In May of 2016, the Department of Labor under the Barack Obama Administration issued its own revisions to the overtime requirement, raising the salary threshold to $47,476 per year. These revisions were set to go into effect December 1, 2016, but Court challenges ...
A common provision in employment agreements may no longer be enforceable, at least for employers in Kentucky.
Earlier today the Supreme Court announced its decision in Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis, holding in a 5-4 split that arbitration agreements providing for individualized proceedings must be enforced. Arbitration provisions in employment contracts are quite common and often include language specifically limiting employees to individualized arbitration proceedings as opposed to class action proceedings or joint-arbitration.
What a difference a presidency makes. Under President Trump, the National Labor Relations Board is continuing to take steps to distance itself from some of the more controversial decisions it issued during the administration of President Barack Obama. This latest action came on January 26, 2018, when the Board announced it was extending the deadline for filing responses to the Board's Request for Information, regarding the Board’s Representation Election Regulations.
The new term of the Supreme Court began last Monday, October 2, and the first case up has the potential to affect millions of employers and employees across the country. The case, Epic Systems Corp v. Lewis (which was consolidated with two other cases, Ernst & Young LLP v. Morris and National Labor Relations Board v. Murphy Oil USA) examines whether employment agreements requiring employers and employees to resolve employment-related disputes through individual arbitration and waive class and collective proceedings are enforceable under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), notwithstanding the provisions of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).
Topics/Tags
Select- Labor & Employment Law
- Coronavirus
- Employment Law
- Labor Law
- Employee Benefits and Executive Compensation
- NLRB
- Discrimination
- IRS
- Department of Labor
- Sexual Orientation Discrimination
- Arbitration
- Retirement
- Employer Policies
- ERISA
- NLRA
- Americans with Disabilities Act
- Accommodation
- Race Discrimination
- Litigation
- Social Media
- ACA
- Affordable Car Act
- National Labor Relations Act
- National Labor Relations Board
- Reasonable Accommodation
- Employer Handbook
- Employment Litigation
- EEOC
- Wage & Hour
- 401(k)
- Federal Arbitration Act
- Title VII
- ADAAA
- Paycheck Protection Program
- Workplace Accommodations
- Sexual Harassment
- Employer Rules
- Unions
- Transgender Issues
- Technology
- Employment Settlement Agreements
- Privacy
- Securities Law
- FMLA
- Disability
- Workplace Violence
- Preventive Care Benefits
- Health Savings Account
- SECURE Act
- Sixth Circuit
- US Department of Labor Employee Benefits Security Administration
- Disability Discrimination
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
- Fair Labor Standards Act
- OSHA
- Religion Discrimination
- Overtime Pay
- Gender Identity Discrimination
- Posting Requirements
- Class Action Litigation
- Disability Law
- Representative Election Regulations
- E-Discovery
- Evidence
- Department of Justice
- Benefits
- Family and Medical Leave Act
- Environmental Law
- Privacy Laws
- Older Workers' Benefit Protection Act (OWBPA)
- Healthcare Reform
- Telecommuting
- Electronically Stored Information
- Affirmative Action
- Equal Opportunity Clause
- Compensable Time
- Pregnancy Discrimination
- Security Screening
- Supreme Court
- Occupational Safety and Health Administration
- E-Discovery Case Law
- Electronic Data Discovery
- ESI
- Unemployment Insurance Integrity Act
- Attendance Policy
- Return to Work
- Seniority Rights
- American Medical Association
- Classification
- Confidentiality
- Equal Pay
- Fair Minimum Wage
- Federal Minimum Wage
- Genetic Information Discrimination
- Media Policy
- Misclassification
- National Origin Discrimination
- Retaliation
- State Minimum Wage
- Wage Increase
- Disability Leave
- Social Media Content
- Employment Incentives
- HIRE Act
- Social Security Tax
- Taxation
- Antitrust
Recent Posts
- The Practical Employment Law Podcast: Termination Done Right - Part 2
- The Practical Employment Law Podcast: Labor & Employment Update - COVID-19 Issues
- The Practical Employment Law Podcast: Labor & Employment Update Week of 3/1/21
- The Practical Employment Law Podcast: Termination Done Right - Part 1
- The Practical Employment Law Podcast: Welcome 2021 - 5 Things for Employers to Consider
- Congressional Proposal Extends Tax Credits to Companies Providing Paid Leave, but Allows Requirement to Expire
- The Practical Employment Law Podcast: EEOC Issues New Guidance on COVID-19 Vaccinations
- The Practical Employment Law Podcast: Non-Compete Agreements - Five Mistakes by Three Parties
- The Practical Employment Law Podcast: Employment At-Will – Myth or Reality?
- The Practical Employment Law Podcast: COVID-19 Immunity Laws