Understanding the New Overtime Tax Policies in the Big Beautiful Bill
Is the Four-Day Workweek Really a Benefit? What’s the Tea in L&E?
Constangy Clips Ep. 11 - Summer Interns and Short-Term Workers: 3 Tips for Managing Seasonal Hires
New Executive Order Targets Disparate Impact Claims Nationwide - #WorkforceWednesday® - Employment Law This Week®
Navigating Contractor vs. Employee Classification
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast | Episode 45: New Leadership at Employment-Related Federal Agencies with David Dubberly of Maynard Nexsen
Employee Rights in Non-Unionized Workplaces: What's the Tea in L&E?
The Changing Landscape of EEOC Enforcement and Disparate Impact
Multijurisdictional Employers, Part 1: Independent Contractors vs. Employees
The Labor Law Insider: How Unions Are Navigating Trump 2.0, Part II
The Evolution of Equal Pay: Lessons From 9 to 5 — Hiring to Firing Podcast
The Labor Law Insider - How Unions Are Navigating Trump 2.0, Part I
Insider Strategies for Wage and Hour Compliance Success: One-on-One with Paul DeCamp
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast - Episode 42: Non-Compete Agreements with Mitchell Greggs of Maynard Nexsen
Stumbling Your Way Into a Union: Key Advice for Employers: What’s the Tea in L&E?
The Labor Law Insider: What's Next for Labor Law Under the Trump Administration, Part I
The Labor Law Insider: Student Athletes as Employees – Changes and Updates on the Dartmouth Case, NIL Litigation
#WorkforceWednesday®: Employment Law in 2025: A Look Ahead - Employment Law This Week®
#WorkforceWednesday®: 2024 Workforce Review - Top Labor and Employment Law Trends and Updates - Employment Law This Week®
Employment Law Now VIII-155 - The Trump 2.0 Impact on Labor and Employment Law
Last month, the most significant legal development in the area of independent contractor (IC) compliance and misclassification was on Capitol Hill. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, a Senate Republican who chairs the Senate Health,...more
On February 20, 2025, Judge Jeffrey P. Hopkins of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio entered an order preliminarily approving a $20.8 million settlement in a collective and class action lawsuit by...more
On September 12, 2024, a Yakima, Washington jury awarded a $237.6 million nuclear verdict to Tahvio Gratton, a former package delivery driver who filed a lawsuit against his employer for violation of federal and state...more
Many employers in the hospitality industry are ramping up their hiring efforts as they get ready for their busiest season. Whether you’re operating a restaurant, hotel, swim club, tourist attraction, or other business that’s...more
Executive Summary - 2024 promises to be a consequential year for employers. The U.S. is preparing for an election that will likely have a significant impact on the future of employment and labor law. At the same time,...more
Under both state and federal law, employers must pay their employees for the hours they work and are prohibited from discriminating against employees and job applicants. However, whether it is due to implicit bias, putting...more
Executive Summary - Widespread economic uncertainty. Evolving workforce expectations. Accelerating use of artificial intelligence (AI). A shifting patchwork of local, state and federal regulations. Numerous headwinds...more
In a pro-employer decision addressing the overlap of federal and California wage and hour law, the California Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District upheld summary adjudication for the employer, finding that the...more
Since March 12, there have been 1,914 lawsuits (including 152 class actions) filed against employers due to alleged labor and employment violations related to the coronavirus....more
As you might recall from our previous post, The 10th Circuit Grants Re-leaf to Workers Seeking Overtime Under the FLSA, the 10th Circuit held that cannabis employers are not immune from federal overtime laws even though the...more
As states lift their “stay-at-home” orders, employers who have struggled to survive the economic toll of the COVID-19 crisis now face a new threat: uncertain legal liability in a post-COVID market. As we transition away from...more
In the wake of the impeachment proceedings, the State of the Union, the Administration’s budget proposal, and the initial rounds of the battle to see who gets the Democratic Presidential nomination, it’s been pretty quiet on...more
The former employees of a waste management company sued their former employer for violations of various federal and state labor laws. The company sought to compel arbitration and dismiss the complaint, relying on an...more
In advance of their first official meeting of 2020, members of Philadelphia City Council outlined their legislative priorities, and several say they intend to introduce legislation to increase protections for employees....more
How long should Arizona employers keep employment records? The short answer is - it depends. Most Arizona and federal employment law claims have a fairly short statute of limitations. Under Title VII, employees must file a...more
The California Supreme Court has rejected the federal Fair Labor Standards Act’s de minimis doctrine and put the burden on employers to account for “all hours worked.” Our Labor & Employment Group explains the court’s ruling...more
On July 26, 2018, the California Supreme Court issued its long-awaited opinion in Troester v. Starbucks Corp., __ P.3d __ (2018). In the days that have followed, legal headlines have lamented the presumed “death” of the de...more
On August 6, 2012, Douglas Troester, a former shift supervisor at a Starbucks location, filed a lawsuit against Starbucks in state court in Los Angeles, California. Mr. Troester filed his lawsuit on behalf of himself and a...more
Last week, in Troester v. Starbucks, a unanimous California Supreme Court held that California labor statutes and wage orders do not incorporate federal de minimis work exceptions. Yet, the Court declined to define when, if...more
In a long-awaited decision, the California Supreme Court rejected the federal de minimis doctrine, making clear that in any instance in which employees perform “minutes of work,” before or after their shifts, that time must...more
Last week, the California Supreme Court ruled in favor of a former Starbucks employee seeking compensation for time spent closing the store after clocking out. This decision in Troester v. Starbucks may limit the ability of...more
On July 26, 2018, the California Supreme Court issued its long awaited decision in Troester v. Starbucks Corporation (S234969) on whether California wage and hour law recognizes the de minimis doctrine established by the...more
• In Troester v. Starbucks Corporation, the California Supreme Court on July 26, 2018, resoundingly rejected the de minimis doctrine commonly applied under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) to claims for unpaid...more
Yesterday, the California Supreme Court issued its ruling in Troester v. Starbucks Corporation, and departed from federal law’s more employer-friendly version of the de minimis rule, which it characterized as stuck in the...more