Labor & Employment Developments Blog

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.

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.

On June 5, 2025, the Supreme Court lowered the bar for majority-group plaintiffs – ruling they are not required to meet a higher standard to bring reverse discrimination claims. The Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Ames v. Ohio Dept. of Youth Servs. that members of majority groups alleging employment discrimination under Title VII need not meet a higher evidentiary standard. This decision invalidates the “background circumstances” rule previously applied by the Sixth Circuit, which required that majority-group plaintiffs demonstrate specific evidence suggesting their employer is an unusual employer who discriminates against the majority.

On March 7^th, 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 ...

Auto service advisors are overtime-exempt under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision in Encino Motorcars, LLC v. Navarro clarified the scope of a 2011 regulation issued by the Department of Labor that excluded service advisors from the definition of “salesman” under 29 U.S.C. §213(b)(10)(A).

On December 24, 2015, the NLRB ruled that an employer’s policy prohibiting employees from recording images or verbal exchanges in the workplace was unlawful.    

For employers, compliance with wage-hour laws, including the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) is more important than ever.  A top lawyer at the Department of Labor (“DOL”) stated earlier this month during a conference that the DOL has a new emphasis on investigations of potential FLSA violations.