Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Features

National Litigation Hotline Image

National Litigation Hotline

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters &

National rulings you need to know.

Features

Recent Developments from Around the States Image

Recent Developments from Around the States

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters &

Recent rulings of interest to you and your practice.

Features

Labor Law Update Image

Labor Law Update

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters &

A rundown of significant recent developments in labor law.

NY High Court Must Clarify Employee Choice Doctrine Image

NY High Court Must Clarify Employee Choice Doctrine

Tom Perrotta

A federal appeals court has put a $2.9 million employment lawsuit by a former investment banker on hold until the New York Court of Appeals can answer an undecided question of state law.

Seven Reasons Why Mediating Employment Disputes Is a Good Idea Image

Seven Reasons Why Mediating Employment Disputes Is a Good Idea

Marc R. Engel

The explosion of employment claims in this country has resulted in an increased focus on resolving employment disputes prior to trial, in particular through mediation. Unfortunately, businesses and their managers often fail to appreciate why employment matters are particularly well-suited to mediation. This, in turn, discourages parties from participating meaningfully in mediation. The following article examines seven compelling reasons why mediation is such an attractive and viable option for prospective litigants.

Features

National Litigation Hotline Image

National Litigation Hotline

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters &

Recent rulings for your review.

Features

Recent Developments from Around the States Image

Recent Developments from Around the States

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters &

National cases of interest to you and your practice.

Whistleblower Case Invokes Employment Rule Exception Image

Whistleblower Case Invokes Employment Rule Exception

Philip M. Berkowitz

Many have noted the unanticipated consequences of Sarbanes Oxley's (SOX) whistleblower protection. One significant question has been how, in light of the statute's remedial nature but its focus on remedying securities fraud, courts should construe its definition of protected activity. In particular, courts (and the Department of Labor administrative law judges who generally hear these cases at the outset) have struggled with SOX's requirement that to be a protected whistleblower, the employee must complain about conduct that he or she 'reasonably believes constitutes a violation of ' any rule or regulation of the [SEC], or any provision of Federal law relating to fraud against shareholders' (<i>see</i> 18 U.S.C. ' 1514A).

Features

Supreme Court: Title VII Employee Threshold Does Not Determine Jurisdiction Image

Supreme Court: Title VII Employee Threshold Does Not Determine Jurisdiction

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters &

The United States Supreme Court has resolved a significant issue regarding coverage under Title VII: whether the 15-employee threshold for determining whether an individual or entity is an 'employer' covered by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is a substantive element of plaintiff's claim for relief, or a jurisdictional issue. (Arbaugh v. Y &amp; H Corp., No. 04-944 (2006)). In Arbaugh, the Supreme Court, reversing the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, held that the 15-employee threshold is an element of a plaintiff's claim that must be challenged prior to trial on the merits. The Supreme Court's decision is significant because evaluating the number of employees as a substantive issue would allow a federal court to exercise supplemental jurisdiction and to retain discretion to hear pendent state law claims even if it dismisses the federal claims for failure to state a claim.

Features

New Rule on 'Internet Applicant' Image

New Rule on 'Internet Applicant'

Albert J. Solecki, Jr. & Laurie E. Holsey

The Department of Labor's Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) oversees compliance with the equal opportunity and affirmative action requirements applicable to all government contractors. The OFCCP is charged with enforcing Executive Order 11246, which prohibits federal contractors from discriminating against applicants on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The Order also requires contractors to use affirmative action so that equal opportunity is available for all phases of employment. As such, contractors must retain all applicant-related company records as well as other employment records. In particular, contractors are required to maintain records of 'applicant flow data' by soliciting gender, race and ethnicity information from all applicants. If a contractor fails to comply with the rules issued by the OFCCP, it will be subject to disciplinary action, ranging from citations and economic fines to debarment.

Need Help?

  1. Prefer an IP authenticated environment? Request a transition or call 800-756-8993.
  2. Need other assistance? email Customer Service or call 1-877-256-2472.

MOST POPULAR STORIES