With the Federal Trade Commission’s non-compete ban out of the picture, the Supreme Court barring most universal injunctions, and the National Labor Relations’ Board directive identifying non-compete agreements as violating the National Labor Relations Act rescinded, the enforceability of non-competes is even more of a state-by-state issue. Florida recently passed HB1219, the Contracts Honoring Opportunity, Investment, …
Washington State Expands Employee Access to Personnel Files
Washington State has long required employers to allow employees to inspect their own personnel files, but the relevant statutes previously did not define what qualifies as a “personnel file” nor provide clear timelines for providing it. Washington State recently amended these statutes, including making three key changes: (1) defining “personnel file,” (2) establishing timelines for …
Continue reading “Washington State Expands Employee Access to Personnel Files”
Who’s the Boss? Understanding Joint Employment Under the NLRA
Our story begins like this: Your business is notified of a National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) Unfair Labor Practice Charge (the “Charge”). You’re about to email your lawyer when—here’s the twist—you learn your company is one of two named in the Charge. You might be considered a joint employer. When can this happen, what does …
Continue reading “Who’s the Boss? Understanding Joint Employment Under the NLRA”
One Standard to Rule Them All: Supreme Court Strikes Down Higher Bar for Majority Plaintiffs
Introduction On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Service that fundamentally altered how reverse discrimination claims are assessed under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”). The Court ruled that employees from majority groups, (e.g., white, heterosexual, male) are …
AI on Trial: Implications of the Workday Lawsuit for Automated Hiring
Artificial intelligence continues revolutionizing HR and talent acquisition, promising efficiency and scalability in hiring processes. However, as a recent lawsuit against Workday shows, automation does not absolve employers or their vendors of compliance with anti-discrimination laws. In Mobley v. Workday, Inc., Case No. 23-CV-770, a California federal judge allowed a collective action age discrimination lawsuit …
Continue reading “AI on Trial: Implications of the Workday Lawsuit for Automated Hiring”
Start the Clock—The Case for Including Contractual Limitations Periods in Employment Agreements.
Contractual limitations periods provide parties on both sides of an agreement certainty regarding the filing of a potential action. But many employers do not know that they may include such contractual limitations periods in their employment applications and agreements. Those contractual limitations periods can be effective in limiting exposure for potential claims. In, King v. …
ACA Reporting Update: Some Relief and Process Streamlining for Employers
Applicable large employers (“ALEs”) are subject to reporting requirements under the Affordable Care Act (the “ACA”). To comply with the reporting requirements, an ALE must file a Form 1095-C with the IRS reporting certain information about the ALE’s offer of coverage to each full-time employee, identifying the employee, spouse, and dependents who are covered under …
Continue reading “ACA Reporting Update: Some Relief and Process Streamlining for Employers”
Should You Use a Performance Improvement Plan?
A Performance Improvement Plan (“PIP”) is a long-standing HR tool for managing underperforming employees. Employers often use a PIP to document deficiencies and outline specific goals the underperforming employee must reach within a specific timeframe. While PIPs sound good in theory, they have recently come under criticism from employees, HR professionals, and even employment lawyers. …
Continue reading “Should You Use a Performance Improvement Plan?”
If the Deadline for Self-Correcting Retirement Plan Errors Is Indefinite, Why Do I Have to Hurry?
Section 305 of SECURE 2.0 added rules for self-correcting a new category of retirement plan errors under the Employee Plans Compliance Resolution System (“ECPRS”). Specifically, Section 305 allows an “eligible inadvertent failure” to be self-corrected at any time, even if the error is considered a “significant” operational error under EPCRS. Section 305 provides that the …
Both Employers and Participants Benefit from New IRS Guidance on Correcting Inadvertent Benefit Overpayments
Retirement plan administration mistakes require difficult conversations with participants, especially when the mistake involves an overpayment. Changes in the law, specifically, SECURE 2.0 and IRS Notice 2024-77, give plan fiduciaries additional flexibility when addressing overpayments. Overpayment of Matching Contributions Consider the case of a 401(k) plan with an employer matching contribution on the first 6% …