Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Congress enacted the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) to allow employees to take necessary leave from their jobs for their own or a family member's serious health condition. Congress's intent was to help employees to “balance the demands of the workplace with the needs of families, to promote the stability and economic security of families, and to promote national interest in preserving family integrity ' in a manner that accommodates the legitimate interests of employers.” 29 U.S.C. ' 2601.
The balance struck was that certain employees (those who have worked for 12 months and at least 1,250 hours) of certain employers (those with 50 or more employees) could take up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave in a year to care for either themselves or a family member with a serious medical condition. The year can be calculated on a rolling basis, or a fixed year, such as a calendar year, the fiscal year, or an employee's anniversary date. 29 C.F.R. ' 825.200(b).
As “remedial legislation,” courts often rule on the employee side of the scale when interpreting the law's provisions. See, e.g., Nevada Dep't of Human Res. v. Hibbs, 538 U.S. 721, 735 (2003) (finding a history of gender-based discrimination in the administration of leave benefits justified the enactment of the FMLA as a prophylactic law). The Department of Labor (DOL) promulgated guidelines to assist employers in the implementation of the FMLA. Similar to courts' employee-friendly interpretations, the DOL placed certain burdens on employers. One of those burdens was that an employer has the responsibility to designate leave as FMLA leave and provide employees with notice of their rights under the law, once it has “acquired knowledge that the leave is being taken for a FMLA qualifying reason.” 29 C.F.R. ' 825.301. In other words, it is the employer's responsibility to know that leave was protected under the FMLA, not an employee's obligation to request the protection of the law.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.