<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 May 2012 11:26:20 GMT</lastBuildDate>
    <title>Labor &amp; Employment Law Alert - US</title>
    <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US</link>
    <description>
    </description>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">4ba7922a-c777-407f-abe4-8cf489220d91</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 May 2012 11:26:20 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>The NLRB's Acting General Counsel Asserts an Unprecedented Challenge to Employee Handbook Receipt Provisions</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/NLRBs-Acting-General-Counsel-Asserts-Unprecedented-Challenge-to-Employee-Handbook-Receipt-Provisions</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">842add40-330a-4b10-9628-d9c2d6f7730a</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 May 2012 16:24:58 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Seventh Circuit Authorizes An "Issue Class Action" in Response to Dukes</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Seventh-Circuit-Authorizes-An-Issue-Class-Action-in-Response-to-Dukes</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">6037fd79-54b9-4242-b0c8-800ad18056d8</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 May 2012 17:09:27 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>California High Court Rejects Fee Request For Rest Break Claims</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/California-High-Court-Rejects-Fee-Request-For-Rest-Break-Claims</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">6d4acbfe-9813-4667-8bc0-8a5d6878195d</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Apr 2012 14:45:48 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>NLRB Notice Posting Rule Delayed</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/NLRB-Notice-Posting-Rule-Delayed</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">23df10d4-a929-4488-b7bd-3463d63b9618</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Apr 2012 13:12:56 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Brinker – Was It Worth The Wait For Employers?</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Brinker-Was-It-Worth-The-Wait-For-Employers</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">c3411298-6a3b-4e5f-954b-80cbdd16b8c0</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Apr 2012 14:30:09 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Preparing For May Day, And Beyond, At The NLRB</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Preparing-For-May-Day-And-Beyond-At-The-NLRB</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">5d1702e9-6b84-45c3-bf29-19070fd3d704</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Apr 2012 11:21:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Maryland Takes the Lead on Social Media Access Legislation</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Maryland-Takes-the-Lead-on-Social-Media-Access-Legislation</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">46fcd327-f266-470a-b88f-5bc5b3b68f94</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2012 10:16:58 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Transgender Employees Protected By Federal Law Against Discrimination</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Transgender-Employees-Protected-By-Federal-Law-Against-Discrimination</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">804913fd-7e26-4c2b-bb8c-d28fee2d09ca</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 Feb 2012 14:41:52 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Federal Court Imposes Broad Preservation Obligation Regarding Potential Class Members in FLSA Action</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Federal-Court-Imposes-Broad-Preservation-Obligation-Regarding-Potential-Class-Members-in-FLSA-Action</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">aec0921a-6765-4130-97bd-431ae83b89b4</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2012 14:59:17 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>California and the USDOL Stake Out Common Ground in Focusing on Alleged Misclassification of Employees as Independent Contractors</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/California-and-the-USDOL-Stake-Out-Common-Ground-in-Focusing-on-Alleged-Misclassification-of-Employees-as-Independent-Contractors</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">4a117d58-b28f-4f1c-b648-f07c7d0121b4</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 15:33:43 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Department of Labor Proposes FMLA Rule on Leave for Caregivers to Servicemembers and Airline Flight Crew Employees</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Department-of-Labor-Proposes-FMLA-Rule-on-Leave-for-Caregivers-to-Servicemembers-and-Airline-Flight-Crew-Employees</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">777c6dd8-d8cc-40ac-ac02-49d40c6bd8af</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 11:26:01 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Second Circuit Weighs in Again on Class Action Waivers in Arbitration Agreements</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Second-Circuit-Weighs-in-Again-on-Class-Action-Waivers-in-Arbitration-Agreements</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">2957f031-36fa-4e20-aef8-8ced2448976b</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Mar 2012 11:18:36 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>NLRB Clarifies Its Position Regarding Employees' Social Media Usage </title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/NLRB-Clarifies-Its-Position-Regarding-Employees'-Social-Media-Usage </link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">d15621d6-548c-41c0-ba22-6d986f099208</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Jan 2012 16:19:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>“Collyer Lite” -- NLRB Announces Limitation on Collyer Deferral</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Collyer-Lite-NLRB-Announces-Limitation-on-Collyer-Deferral</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">0226c407-618f-4421-8121-4968f76f3d0a</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Jan 2012 16:36:31 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>FMLA Protections from Interference and Retaliation Extended to Pre-Eligible Employees</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/FMLA-Protections-from-Interference-and-Retaliation-Extended-to-Pre-Eligible-Employees</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">745a7c87-272c-4a61-bbf7-0790a041acad</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Jan 2012 18:05:07 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>NLRB and FINRA Signal Federal Push To Create A Right for Employees To Pursue Collective Litigation Regardless of Arbitration Agreements</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/NLRB-and-FINRA-Signal-Federal-Push-To-Create-A-Right-for-Employees-To-Pursue-Collective-Litigation-Regardless-of-Arbitration-Agreements</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">d1eade4b-d84c-48cc-8f3d-6da9a2470fbb</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jan 2012 10:29:28 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>New DOT Regulations Require Commercial Truckers to Hit the "Breaks"</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/New-DOT-Regulations-Require-Commercial-Truckers-to-Hit-the-Breaks</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">ddc518bf-bda0-47e2-8d0e-0256d899bf78</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 22 Dec 2011 16:02:09 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>NLRB Issues Final Rule On "Quickie" Elections</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/NLRB-Issues-Final-Rule-On-Quickie-Elections</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">7b5fc171-ba47-405c-b4bc-467703d4306f</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Dec 2011 15:13:32 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>"Sea Change" in OFCCP Disability Regulations Would Mean Increased Turbulence for Contractors</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Sea-Change-in-OFCCP-Disability-Regulations-Would-Mean-Increased-Turbulence-for-Contractors</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">d69b4c05-6e9d-4eec-988f-49abde694ec5</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Dec 2011 15:50:53 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>NLRB Scales Back -- But Not By Much -- The New "Quickie" Election Rules it Proposed on June 22, 2011</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/NLRB-Scales-Back-But-Not-By-Much-The-New-Quickie-Election-Rules-it-Proposed-on-June-22-2011</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">6466479c-6c46-4448-a1a8-40dbced68c34</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2011 16:06:58 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Federal Court Upholds OFCCP Demand For Data</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Federal-Court-Upholds-OFCCP-Demand-For-Data</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">21e3c520-6f47-450a-95b4-5ecfe5edde73</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Nov 2011 14:11:39 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>OSHA Revises Its Sarbanes-Oxley Whistleblower Rules Impacting Public Companies and Their Affiliates and Subsidiaries</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/OSHA-Revises-Its-Sarbanes-Oxley-Whistleblower-Rules-Impacting-Public-Companies-and-Their-Affiliates-and-Subsidiaries</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">69fcdb97-6c7f-41fd-8bb2-29fbdbe3cc31</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Oct 2011 13:13:32 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>California Seating Lawsuits Meeting Resistance, But Employers Shouldn't Sit Idly By</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/California-Seating-Lawsuits-Meeting-Resistance-But-Employers-Shouldnt-Sit-Idly-By</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">f4556644-a891-4560-b044-1421cec5af78</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Oct 2011 13:26:26 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>California Enacts Legislation Limiting Employers' Use of Consumer Credit Reports for Employment Purposes</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/California-Enacts-Legislation-Limiting-Employers-Use-Consumer-Credit-Reports-Employment-Purposes</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">4021273c-b5de-40f6-bb19-9369d80b26cd</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Oct 2011 10:21:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>NLRB Postpones Implementation of Its New Employee Rights Posting Requirement</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/NLRB-Postpones-Implementation-of-New-Employee-Rights-Posting-Requirement</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">a9c1fd7c-6740-4456-9a87-4c03bbecea40</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Sep 2011 09:43:22 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Seattle Enacts Ordinance Requiring Paid Sick Leave and Paid Safe Time</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Seattle-Enacts-Ordinance-Requiring-Paid-Sick-Leave-and-Paid-Safe-Time</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">1a18aa0a-7851-4b2e-9584-13f23f5e1c84</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Sep 2011 14:08:05 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>NLRB Makes Employee Rights Poster Available on its Website Shortly After Commencement of a Lawsuit Challenging its Posting Rule</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/NLRB-Makes-Employee-Rights-Poster-Available-Website-After-Commencement-of-Lawsuit Challenging-Posting-Rule</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">b2f451fe-d581-4956-94a4-ba35a03799e9</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Sep 2011 08:48:46 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>National Labor Relations Board Alters Landscape for Determining the Scope of Petitioned-For Bargaining Units</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/NLRB-Alters-Landscape-for-Determining-the-Scope-of-Petitioned-For-Bargaining-Units</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">16a755a0-990a-452f-bd34-ec364f5d7578</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Sep 2011 10:22:35 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>The NLRB Overrules Prior Decisions to Reinstate "Recognition Bar" Protection for Unions Voluntarily Recognized and "Successor Bar" Protection for Incumbent Unions</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/NLRB-Overrules-Prior-Decisions-to-Reinstate-Recognition-Bar-Protection-for-Unions-Voluntarily-Recognized-Successor-Bar-Protection-for-Incumbent-Unions</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">a7b11e4a-bd32-4f97-9f47-8cd6d4b27b5d</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Sep 2011 14:51:42 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>NLRB Imposes New Employee Rights Posting Requirement on Covered Employers</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/NLRB-Imposes-New-Employee-Rights-Posting-Requirement-on-Covered-Employers</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">6578e69a-fab9-42cf-9b5e-7f6a6343b0b4</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Aug 2011 13:48:18 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>OFCCP Seeks Input on Development of New Compensation Reporting Tool</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/OFCCP-Seeks-Input-on-Development-of-New-Compensation-Reporting-Tool</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">be510e58-4d5f-4b23-b028-57d81edb0cfc</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Jul 2011 16:22:47 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>OFCCP Drumbeat Continues: Agency Announces New FAAP Procedures</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/OFCCP-Drumbeat-Continues-Agency-Announces-New-FAAP</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">6b08280f-e57a-4d61-9b8b-5e12e3c77717</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Jun 2011 08:17:05 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>The NLRB and USDOL Issue Controversial Proposed Regulations To Aid Union Organizing</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/The-NLRB-and-USDOL-Issue-Controversial-Proposed</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">1f73dada-d00a-4d62-b2c2-ff091d3d743c</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Jun 2011 17:22:16 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Supreme Court Changes The Class Action Landscape In Dukes v. Wal-Mart</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Supreme-Court-Changes-The-Class-Action-Landscape-In-i</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">8574b377-b12c-4548-bc0a-17acfb1905fd</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jun 2011 16:17:41 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Connecticut to Become First State to Mandate Guaranteed Paid Sick-Leave Time for Employees</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Connecticut-to-Become-First-State-to-Mandate-Guaranteed</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">8755611e-02b6-451c-b4de-0e5f36bb5fad</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Jun 2011 15:44:06 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>EEOC Proposes to Extend Title VII and ADA Recordkeeping Requirements to Include Entities Covered by GINA</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/EEOC-Proposes-to-Extend-Title-VII-and-ADA-Recordkeeping</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">adb603c4-f53f-4cff-8dce-284625b5031b</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 31 May 2011 10:32:15 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Fifth Circuit Applies Recent Supreme Court Decision to Revive Son's Title VII Retaliation Claim Based on Father's Protected Activity</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Fifth-Circuit-Applies-Recent-Supreme-Court-Decision-to</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">f61fd86b-82fd-4b8f-9ffa-da83e555cc54</guid>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 May 2011 16:48:53 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Think That California Lawsuits Over Seating Concern Only Retail Cashiers? Think Again</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Think-That-California-Lawsuits-Over-Seating-Concern-Only</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">323207dc-70b3-4d75-8e47-b27c653c67c5</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 May 2011 12:16:46 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Circuit Court Rules No Cause of Action for Discrimination Against Debtors</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Circuit-Court-Rules-No-Cause-of-Action-for-Discrimination</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">23514881-d8c4-4575-bb9d-18741be4c745</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 May 2011 10:51:59 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>NLRB Sues Arizona in Federal Court over Constitutional Amendment Requiring Secret Ballot Elections for Union Representation</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/NLRB-Sues-Arizona-in-Federal-Court-over-Constitutional</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">74fcc02a-0980-4313-9579-16ebdfbdbd88</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 May 2011 11:20:55 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>You Wanna Sue Your Employer for Overtime? The Labor Department Has an App for That!</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/You-Wanna-Sue-Your-Employer-for-Overtime-The-Labor</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">6f77b68b-b5a3-452a-b43d-17c2e0c6880a</guid>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 May 2011 16:01:23 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Philadelphia Is Latest Jurisdiction to "Ban the Box" in Hiring Processes</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Philadelphia-Is-Latest-Jurisdiction-to-Ban-the-Box-in</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">88e40de7-1f05-4d6f-bb29-71a750a5f37c</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Apr 2011 12:01:41 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>New York State Department of Labor Issues Guidance and Sample Templates in Connection With the New York Wage Theft Prevention Act</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/New-York-State-Department-of-Labor-Issues-Guidance-and</link>
      <description> </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">e4b7d234-5b50-47e9-87e8-f660a8680e4e</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>EEOC Issues Final Regulations on ADA Amendments Act of 2008</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/EEOC-Issues-Final-Regulations-on-ADA-Amendments-Act-of</link>
      <description>The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") recently issued its final revised Regulations to Implement the Equal Employment Provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act, as Amended ("Regulations"), and accompanying interpretative guidance.  These final Regulations, which interpret the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act of 2008 ("ADAAA"), will take effect on May 24, 2011.

 </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">bd23a75b-2208-44b3-ada7-fc6787b25634</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>New York Wage Theft Prevention Act Takes Effect on April 9, 2011</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/New-York-Wage-Theft-Prevention-Act-Takes-Effect-on-April-9</link>
      <description>The New York Wage Theft Prevention Act ("Act"), effective April 9, 2011, implements new mandates regarding wage and hour notifications and recordkeeping for New York employers, and provides for increased civil and criminal penalties for their violation of these new and existing requirements. 

 </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">fcde6ff1-c9f5-43d7-9eff-0920d3b88201</guid>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Apr 2011 12:51:51 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>IRS Issues Guidance on Mandatory Form W-2 Informational Reporting of Employer-Sponsored Health Coverage</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/IRS-Issues-Guidance-on-Mandatory-Form-W-2-Informational</link>
      <description>On March 29, 2011, the IRS issued Notice 2011-28 ("Notice"), which provides interim guidance to employers regarding the new Form W-2 reporting requirement for employer-sponsored group health coverage.  This requirement was added to the Internal Revenue Code ("Code") by last year's health reform legislation, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, Pub. L. No. 111-149 ("PPACA").  The IRS has requested comments, which are due by June 27, 2010, on this interim guidance.

 </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">d5a35e94-d02d-4b7a-91e5-e5f299416cd5</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Oral Complaints are Sufficient to Support an FLSA Retaliation Claim</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Oral-Complaints-are-Sufficient-to-Support-an-FLSA</link>
      <description>The U.S. Supreme Court recently held, in Kasten v Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics Corp., that an employee who is discharged after orally complaining to his employer about wage and hour issues may bring a claim for retaliation under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA").  An oral complaint, according to the Court, may be "sufficiently clear and detailed for a reasonable employer to understand it, in light of both content and context, as an assertion of rights protected by the statute and a call for their protection."  Employers must, in light of the Saint-Gobain decision, pay close attention to the manner in which they receive, respond to and address such oral complaints by employees.   

 </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">ae779fc4-3ab1-4068-8d96-ddbf1ab512eb</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>NLRB Flexes Its Muscles by Opposing State Constitutional Amendments Requiring the Use of Secret Ballot Elections for Union Representation Purposes and Limiting Deferral to Arbitration</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/NLRB-Flexes-Its-Muscles-by-Opposing-State-Constitutional</link>
      <description>The National Labor Relations Board ("NLRB" or "Board") has recently taken the position that state constitutional amendments mandating the use of secret ballot union representation elections for representation purposes violate the National Labor Relations Act ("NLRA"). Fueled by the desire to prevent intimidation and coercion by unions in the representation process, the voters of Arizona, South Dakota, South Carolina, and Utah have approved state constitutional amendments mandating that employees may choose union representation only through a secret ballot election. The NLRB, through its Acting General Counsel, Lafe Solomon, asserts that these amendments foreclose federally protected rights, and has requested that the four state Attorneys General work to prevent the amendments from taking effect.  Mr. Solomon, who has been nominated for a four-year term as NLRB General Counsel, has indicated that the NLRB will take legal action against any state that enforces the secret ballot requirement. 

...</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">3aa2b6d6-56c3-444d-aa14-8f583cfa7676</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>New York State Hospitality Industry Wage Order Increases the Wages to Be Paid to Tipped Employees and Authorizes Tip Pooling and Tip Sharing</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/New-York-State-Hospitality-Industry-Wage-Order-Increases</link>
      <description>The New York State Department of Labor ("NYSDOL") has provided a holiday gift to employees in the hospitality industry by issuing a new Wage Order, effective January 1, 2011.  This Hospitality Industry Wage Order increases the portion of the $7.25 per hour New York State minimum wage that must be paid to tipped employees.  The NYSDOL has also clarified New York law regarding tip sharing and tip pooling.  These provisions cover tipped restaurant and hotel employees employed in New York State.  The tip credit requirements applicable to tipped employees working in other industries in New York State are covered by the Minimum Wage Order for Miscellaneous Industries and Occupations.  

 </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">712fa608-fef9-4a25-ba04-ecec834f0a1e</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Proposed OSHA Noise Regulations Reverse Long-Standing Interpretations And Increase Potential Costs To Employers</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Proposed-OSHA-Noise-Regulations-Reverse-Long-Standing</link>
      <description>On October 19, 2010, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration proposed changes to occupational noise standards that would significantly increase the cost and burden of compliance by employers in industry and the construction trades. The new interpretations change the focus of noise protection efforts from cost-effective and well-established personal protective equipment ("PPE") such as earplugs to substantially more expensive administrative and engineering controls such as replacing equipment with quieter models or isolating equipment away from employees.  </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">3f059f52-0bea-4864-bb64-279278138e9e</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Marijuana Legalization Under California's Proposition 19: The Impact on Employers</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Marijuana-Legalization-Under-California-s-Proposition-19</link>
      <description>California's Proposition 19, which, if approved by voters on November 2, 2010, would legalize various marijuana-related activities in California, has already generated a great deal of national attention.  In addition to vocal endorsements and opposition within California, in recent days U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder stated, in a letter to former federal drug enforcement chiefs, that, even if Proposition 19 passes, the federal government will "vigorously enforce" federal law (such as the Controlled Substances Act) making marijuana illegal.   Given the likely inconsistent enforcement of marijuana laws nationally and in the state if the proposition passes, the implications for employers in California continue to be a source of speculation.   </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">e924dc0e-245f-46aa-87f4-260a0c8bd46f</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Court Rules Cancer in Remission Is Disability under the ADAAA</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Court-Rules-Cancer-in-Remission-Is-Disability-under-the</link>
      <description>A federal district court in Indiana recently ruled that a plaintiff's past diagnosis of renal cancer qualifies as a "disability" for purposes of the Americans with Disabilities Amendments Act of 2008 ("ADAAA"). The court reached this conclusion even though the plaintiff's cancer was in remission and he had been working with no restrictions for over a year. This case is significant because it is one of the first to decide the extent to which the ADAAA broadens the scope of what conditions may constitute a "disability." Before the enactment of the ADAAA, a medical condition often did not qualify as a "disability" if it was in remission or was episodic in nature. Under the ADAAA, however, a condition that is in remission or episodic in nature may qualify as a disability if it "would substantially limit a major life activity when active." 42 U.S.C. § 12102(4)(D). </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">f562a8a4-2398-4fd4-8e61-325054d28c64</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>New Whistleblower Incentives and Protections in the Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/New-Whistleblower-Incentives-and-Protections-in-the-Dodd</link>
      <description>The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act), which became law at the end of July, contains new incentives for whistleblowers as well as enhanced whistleblower protections. These whistleblower provisions apply beyond the financial services industry, impacting public and private companies across all industries.  </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">bb7134a5-d326-40f3-97d7-dea76e64d023</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>D.C. Issues Final Regulations for Accrued Sick &amp;amp; Safe Leave Act</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/D-C-Issues-Final-Regulations-for-Accrued-Sick-amp-Safe</link>
      <description>The District of Columbia recently issued the final regulations implementing the Accrued Sick and Safe Leave Act of 2008 ("ASSLA" or "the Act"). When the ASSLA went into effect on November 13, 2008, two key questions remained unanswered: 1) which employees are covered under the Act; and 2) when do employees begin to accrue and access leave under the Act? The final regulations answer these questions by clarifying the definition of "employee," especially for those who do not consistently work in the District of Columbia, and confirming that only "employees" (the definition of which was clarified) are eligible to accrue and access paid leave under the Act.  </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">962ece1a-bbea-420b-ae0f-591deccc43df</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Interim Rule Requires Federal Contractors to Report Executive Compensation and First-Tier Subcontract Awards</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Interim-Rule-Requires-Federal-Contractors-to-Report</link>
      <description> the Civilian Agency Acquisition Council and the Defense Acquisition Regulations Council, which have responsibility for the development and maintenance of the Federal Acquisition Regulations (“FAR”) System, issued an interim rule requiring that covered federal contractors disclose information about the compensation paid to their five most highly compensated executives, and to the highest paid executives of their first-tier subcontractors.  </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">1f71650e-a5f1-46b5-9dbc-7100cbc8baf6</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Health Care Reform Regulations Arrive – Now What?  What You Need to Know Right Now About Health Care Reform Regulations (So Far)</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Health-Care-Reform-Regulations-Arrive-Now-What-What-You</link>
      <description>As discussed in our May 12, 2010 Labor &amp; Employment Law Alert, in March 2010, President Obama signed into law both the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act ("PPACA") and the Health Care and Education Tax Credit Reconciliation Act ("HCERA"), which supplemented and modified PPACA (this Alert will refer to these two laws collectively as "Health Care Reform" or "Health Reform Laws"). As we noted in our May 12 Alert, Health Care Reform is an on-going process with compliance requirements developing over time, and the pace of those developments has proven to be quite impressive. To date, in just over 3 months since PPACA was signed into law, the Department of Health and Human Services ("HHS"), Department of Labor ("DOL"), and Department of the Treasury ("Treasury") have jointly issued interim final rules on the following four major provisions of Health Care Reform: </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">b5fdae34-f17c-4bc6-ba58-54a1788eceaf</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Department of Labor's Wage and Hour Division Provides Answers, Raises New Questions</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Department-of-Labor-s-Wage-and-Hour-Division-Provides</link>
      <description>Companies that require their employees to wear uniforms or protective equipment face a number of complicated issues: Is time spent donning and doffing required uniforms and equipment compensable under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA")? If so, can the subject be negotiated with a different result through a collective bargaining agreement ("CBA")? What if the workforce is not represented by a union? In the end, does the donning of required uniforms or equipment qualify as a "principal activity" under the Portal to Portal Act, such that subsequent time (even if spent waiting to be engaged or traveling to the worksite) must be paid? </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">fad9dd72-eed1-4e4d-9bd5-3651b1dfd847</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>New Process Steel – The Supreme Court Sends The NLRB Back To The Drawing Board</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/-i-New-Process-Steel-i-The-Supreme-Court-Sends-The-NLRB</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court invalidated today almost 600 decisions issued by the two members of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) who served for a 27-month period beginning in December, 2007. The Court, in a 5-4 opinion, ruled that the two member panel did not constitute a "quorum" authorized to decide cases under Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act. Section 3(b) is the statutory provision that sets forth the familiar three member panel quorum provisions used by the NLRB in deciding cases. The majority opinion was authored by Justice Stevens, and joined by Chief Justice Roberts, and Associate Justices Scalia, Thomas and Alito. Justice Kennedy, joined by Justices Ginsburg, Breyer and Sotomayer, dissented, agreeing with the government's proposed reading of the statutory provision. </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">52a0ac1e-51af-48ea-9e70-89a9eacd53df</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>New Labor-Rights Poster Requirement for Federal Contractors</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/New-Labor-Rights-Poster-Requirement-for-Federal</link>
      <description>All federal prime contractors who enter into contracts of $100,000 or more, and subcontractors who enter into contracts of greater than $10,000, arising from a solicitation issued by the government on or after June 21, 2010, must post a notice at each of their workplaces informing employees of their rights under the National Labor Relations Act ("NLRA").  A final rule, issued by the Department of Labor May 20, 2010, implements Executive Order 13496, signed by President Obama on January 30, 2009 to supplant the Bush-era "Beck Notice," and mandates the language of the notice. 
 </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">7b194332-ec0a-45d7-8cc9-e6810cea3399</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>What Employers, Employees and Health Plans Need to Know Right Now About Health Care Reform</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/What-Employers-Employees-and-Health-Plans-Need-to-Know</link>
      <description>Health care reform has been the subject of much public debate and, in many cases, misinformation both about the actual content of the new laws and the ways in which the laws are to be applied and interpreted. Regardless of your point of view, it is clear that health care reform will have a significant impact, not only on the health insurance industry but also on employment and employee benefit issues generally. </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">6b8f9a9e-840c-4b38-88ee-296ecf55126d</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>What Should Large Employers Do Now? Implications of Dukes v. Wal-Mart</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/What-Should-Large-Employers-Do-Now-Implications-of-em</link>
      <description>Earlier this week, the Ninth Circuit issued its long-anticipated en banc opinion in Dukes v. Wal-Mart. Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., __ F.3d. __, 2010 WL 1644259 (9th Cir. April 26, 2010). The six-judge majority affirmed the trial court's decision to certify a nationwide Title VII class action against Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Beyond the simply breathtaking result and practical implications of the decision in the Dukes case -- approval of a class action involving up to 1.5 million current and former employees -- the opinion provides another wake-up call to all large employers regarding the risks they face in 2010 and beyond as they administer pay, promotion, and performance management systems that will be characterized by plaintiffs as involving subjectivity and discretion. Dukes, following on the heels of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act in January 2009 and renewed attention at the federal level to the Paycheck Fairness Act, underscores ...</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">56936838-0ec2-48f4-94bd-c51f05c8a073</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Fourth Circuit Enforces Employee's Pre-Filing Release of Qui Tam Action under the False Claims Act, Dismisses Suit</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Fourth-Circuit-Enforces-Employee-s-Pre-Filing-Release-of</link>
      <description>The Fourth Circuit recently ruled that an employee who signed a general release of all federal, state and local claims in connection with his separation from his employer was subsequently barred from bringing a qui tam action under the False Claims Act (FCA). United States ex rel. Radcliffe v. Purdue Pharma, No. 09-1202, __ F.3d __ (4th Cir. 2010). The court held that where the federal government was aware of the fraudulent conduct prior to the filing of the qui tam action, the federal interest served by enforcing releases outweighed the need to provide incentives to individuals to bring qui tam claims. </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">40863a45-226c-485f-bb62-f868bffea2a1</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Becker Means Change At The Labor Board</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Becker-Means-Change-At-The-Labor</link>
      <description>President Obama has filled two of the three vacancies at the National Labor Relations Board with recess appointments. Joining union-side labor lawyer William Pierce is Craig Becker. Becker is a long-time senior lawyer for the SEIU, and has been a staff attorney with the AFL-CIO since 2004. Becker's appointment has generated enormous controversy. Senate Republicans unanimously joined business groups in opposing the nomination. The principal reason is concern that Becker's views on labor law are outside the historical mainstream. Sen. John McCain (R-Az.) described Becker's appointment as "clear payback by the Administration to organized labor." </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">778f5b5a-f513-4a48-a8e5-3f82c2aae744</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>New FTC Guidelines Require Employers To Strengthen Social Networking Policies</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/New-FTC-Guidelines-Require-Employers-To-Strengthen-Social</link>
      <description>The revised guidelines on endorsements and testimonials in advertising, codified at 16 C.F.R. § 255, threaten liability under the Federal Trade Commission Act for both employees and employers if an employee fails to clearly and conspicuously disclose the employer/employee relationship when touting a product or service of the employer, including on a blog, online messaging board, or other social networking platform like Facebook or MySpace. These guidelines target "deceptive" advertising by employees whose endorsements are affected by the "material connections" that exist with their employers but who fail to disclose that such relationships exist.  </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">f1838219-023b-405e-bb58-3eec7afe7186</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Congress Limits Arbitration of Employment Disputes by Defense Contractors and Subcontractors</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Congress-Limits-Arbitration-of-Employment-Disputes-by</link>
      <description>On December 22, President Obama signed into law the 2010 Department of Defense Appropriations Act (H.R. 3326). The spending bill includes a significant amendment, offered by Senator Al Franken of Minnesota, prohibiting certain government contractors from entering into or enforcing arbitration clauses in employment agreements. </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">1dec9bcc-1f5e-4072-81fb-94e5e3f592ed</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>COBRA Subsidy Extended, New Notice Requirements Imposed</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/COBRA-Subsidy-Extended-New-Notice-Requirements</link>
      <description>As discussed in our February 18, 2009 Special Employee Benefits Alert as well as our October 16, 2009 Employee Benefits Update, the Stimulus Bill, also known as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 ("ARRA"), provides a temporary COBRA subsidy intended to help unemployed workers and their families afford continuation health coverage. Under the ARRA, this COBRA subsidy (i.e., federal subsidization of 65% of the applicable COBRA premium) lasted for 9 months of COBRA coverage and was available to employees who were involuntarily terminated anytime between September 1, 2008 and December 31, 2009. In light of both the persistently high unemployment rates and the rapidly approaching closing of the window for eligibility for this subsidy, Congress enacted and, on December 21, 2009, President Obama signed into law, an extension of the COBRA subsidy. The extension appears as part of the Fiscal Year 2010 Defense Appropriations Act ("DAA") and is ...</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">e99b205a-23cd-42cd-b0bc-536227856b49</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Federal Court Grant of Motion for Summary Judgment to Employer Emphasizes Importance of Prompt Remedial Action in Response to Harassment Complaints</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Federal-Court-Grant-of-Motion-for-Summary-Judgment-to</link>
      <description>A recent case before the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland emphasizes the importance of employers' prompt remedial actions in addressing complaints of co-worker harassment.  </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">03a2855e-9474-428d-82c2-718ac8f8e0f5</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>New York State Department of Labor Issues Forms Required When Giving Notice to New Employees Concerning Compensation</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/New-York-State-Department-of-Labor-Issues-Forms-Required</link>
      <description>As previously reported in our October 27, 2009 Client Alert, New York Labor Law Section 195(1) was amended, as of October 26, 2009, to require employers in the State of New York to provide newly hired employees, upon their date of hire, with written notification of their regular rate of pay, overtime rate of pay (if applicable) and regular pay dates. Employers are further required to obtain from each employee a written acknowledgement of their receipt of such notice.  </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">17038326-04a0-4786-8eb7-d5c6683a6d24</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>New York Employers Must Comply With New Notice Requirements</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/New-York-Employers-Must-Comply-With-New-Notice</link>
      <description>Starting October 26, 2009, employers in New York must provide newly-hired employees with written notification of their regular rate of pay, overtime rate of pay, if applicable, and the employer's regular pay dates upon their date of hire. Employers are further required to obtain a written acknowledgement from each employee that he or she has received the required notice. </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">36304601-b54d-4717-aa56-8598a229a9dc</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Employee Benefits Update</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Employee-Benefits-1352329</link>
      <description>While so much of the national focus has been on the pending healthcare reform legislation being discussed in Congress and by President Obama, other important developments in the employee benefits field have recently occurred or are likely to occur in the near term. All three branches of the Government are involved, with the actions of executive agencies and the legislative branch often being intertwined. These developments occupy six distinct areas of continuing concern in the employee benefits field: (1) executive branch initiatives to increase and protect retirement savings; (2) Supreme Court cases involving plan administration and compensation issues; (3) proposals to limit executive compensation; (4) mental health parity regulations; (5) continuing efforts by Congress and the Department of Labor (“DOL”) to require disclosure of fees paid by plans; and (6) further federal and state actions regarding COBRA subsidies. These matters, described in detail below, bear close attention because they will ...</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">61805aea-9a9a-44a7-974b-ef8a8ad05196</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>DOL Issues Proposed Rule Implementing Executive Order 13496 - Notice of NLRA Rights </title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/DOL-Issues-Proposed-Rule-Implementing-Executive-Order</link>
      <description>Federal contractors and subcontractors covered by President Obama's Executive Order 13496, Notification of Employee Rights Under Federal Labor Laws, will soon be required to post new, lengthy notices of their employees' rights under federal labor law. The U.S. Department of Labor ("DOL") issued its Proposed Rule implementing this Obama Executive Order on August 3, 2009. Notable provisions of the Proposed Rule include the following:  </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">cc81084e-c6d1-47df-8683-ec07c575cd34</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Minimum Wage Increases Federally And In 16 Jurisdictions</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Minimum-Wage-Increases-Federally-And-In-16</link>
      <description>Effective Friday, July 24, 2009, the federal minimum wage will increase again to $7.25 per hour for all those employees covered under the minimum wage requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, as amended ("FLSA").  </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">6497b335-a29a-49c3-b7cd-d83722beba72</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Obama Administration to Begin E-Verify Enforcement For Certain Federal Contractors on September 8, 2009</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Obama-Administration-to-Begin-E-Verify-Enforcement-For</link>
      <description>The Obama administration has completed its evaluation of the E-Verify rule and will begin enforcing compliance with the rule on September 8, 2009. As a result, federal contractors and subcontractors will be required to use the federal government's E-Verify system to verify the employment eligibility of all new hires in the U.S. and all employees working in the U.S. on federal contracts valued at $100,000 or higher, or "subcontracts" valued at greater than $3,000. However, the future of E-Verify and the obligations of contractors remain uncertain for two reasons: (1) litigation challenging the E-Verify rule, which had been stayed pending the administration's evaluation, may now move forward; and (2) the Senate has approved an amendment to the 2010 Homeland Security spending bill that would expand E-Verify to apply to all existing employees, and not just new hires or those employees working on federal contracts at the thresholds listed above. </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">2bb8e614-55f0-4732-8111-4ab5b66725f2</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Supreme Court Shifts To "But For" Test In Age Discrimination in Employment Act Claims</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Supreme-Court-Shifts-To-But-For-Test-In-Age-Discrimination</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court recently made it more difficult for plaintiffs to win discrimination claims based on age. In a decision that may bring about sweeping changes in the litigation of claims brought under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1997 (the "ADEA") and other non-Title VII discrimination cases, the Supreme Court decided last week in Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc., No. 08-441, 557 U.S. __, 2009 WL 1685684 (June 18, 2009), that plaintiffs must prove that age is the "but for" cause of the adverse employment action against them. This is a sharp departure from the previous application of a burden-shifting mechanism under which plaintiffs were required to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that age was a "motivating factor" behind the adverse employment action and then employers had the opportunity to prove that the adverse employment action would have occurred absent the illegal motivating factor. </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">e10bddfc-1630-4397-9e00-af2898d6a287</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Fee-Splitting Provisions In Arbitration Agreements Subject To Scrutiny</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Fee-Splitting-Provisions-In-Arbitration-Agreements-Subject</link>
      <description>Reductions in force, particularly in the financial sector, have resulted in a staggering number of employees without work in 2009, some of whom already have brought or likely will bring claims relating to their employment loss. Many firms seeking to avoid the heavy costs of litigation have relied on arbitration agreements as a more efficient and less expensive alternative to resolving employment disputes in court. These agreements often include a provision allocating responsibility for payment of arbitration costs between employers and employees. In Brady v. Williams Capital Group, L.P., 2009 WL 1151322, _ N.Y.S. 2d _ (N.Y.A.D. 1st Dep't April 30, 2009), a New York appellate court issued an important reminder that employers need to scrutinize any fee splitting provisions in their current arbitration agreements. After engaging in a case-specific analysis focused on the plaintiff's ability to pay the arbitration fees and costs, the expected cost differential between arbitration and ...</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">cd8055a6-6d16-481e-9a50-1dbb2734392c</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Full Speed Ahead for San Francisco's Health Care Security Ordinance</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Full-Speed-Ahead-for-San-Francisco-s-Health-Care-Security</link>
      <description>Opponents of the San Francisco Health Care Security Ordinance ("Ordinance") were once again disappointed on March 31, 2009, when U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy refused an emergency request to stop enforcement of the Ordinance. </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">6c5261cc-91d9-4dc1-a39d-56f7076074b6</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Reaux Decision Provides Wake Up Call for Employers Regarding FMLA Policies</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/-em-Reaux-em-Decision-Provides-Wake-Up-Call-for-Employers</link>
      <description>A recent decision of the district court for the Northern District of Illinois highlights the need to scrutinize Family Medical Leave Act ("FMLA") policies and practices to ensure they are not applied in an overly broad fashion. In Reaux v. Infohealth Mgmt. Corp., 2009 WL 635468 (N.D. Ill. March 10, 2009), the court denied Infohealth's motion to dismiss Ms. Reaux's FMLA claim despite the fact that she was not eligible for FMLA leave under the law. In rendering its decision, the Court found that, while Ms. Reaux failed to meet the definition of an eligible employee under the FMLA because Infohealth employed fewer than 50 employees within a 75 mile radius of Ms. Reaux's worksite ("the 50/75 Rule"), Infohealth was equitably estopped from relying upon a defense of FMLA ineligibility to dismiss the case. </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">52dba435-dbbc-4b6b-a7c0-81b26c8f4a9f</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>California Delivers More Flexibility With Alternative Workweek Schedules</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/California-Delivers-More-Flexibility-With-Alternative</link>
      <description>As companies look for ways to restructure their workforces and minimize operating costs in creative ways during this economic downturn, California has made welcome revisions and clarifications to its existing law regarding "alternative workweek arrangements." These alternative workweek schedules, governed by California Labor Code § 500 et seq., are unique to California and allow non-exempt employees to work more than eight hours per day without incurring daily overtime. New legislation, Assembly Bill No. 5 ("AB 5"), effective May 21, 2009, amends California Labor Code § 511, further aligning the law with the realities of business operations and making alternative workweek arrangements more attractive to employees. </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">eb05dbe3-8e3f-4a1c-b820-31e15673db88</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Tenth Circuit Enforces Release of Qui Tam Claim under the False Claims Act</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Tenth-Circuit-Enforces-Release-of-em-Qui-Tam-em-Claim</link>
      <description>Companies seeking to obtain a waiver or settlement of a qui tam action should carefully review the analysis in United States ex rel. Ritchie v. Lockheed Martin Corp., 2009 WL 565517, ___ F.3d ___ (10th Cir. Mar. 6, 2009) to determine whether such agreements will be enforceable. </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">198f8ccf-aee9-49a5-8b15-a93da5d3fd13</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Card Check Legislation Introduced In Congress</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Card-Check-Legislation-Introduced-In</link>
      <description>The Employee Free Choice Act, H.R. 1409 and S. 560, was introduced in both the House of Representatives and Senate yesterday, marking a new beginning of a longstanding effort by the labor movement to change the rules of engagement regarding union organizing and collective bargaining. While the EFCA is assured swift passage in the House of Representatives, it remains unclear whether Democrats will be able to muster the 60 votes required to prevent a Republican filibuster.  </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">59a2279b-fe5f-4edd-8368-644d7012f9b6</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Ninth Circuit Withdraws Sullivan v. Oracle Decision Applying California Labor Laws To Non-California Residents</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Ninth-Circuit-Withdraws-i-Sullivan-v-Oracle-i-Decision</link>
      <description>On February 17, 2009, a panel of the Ninth Circuit issued an order withdrawing its controversial opinion in Sullivan v. Oracle Corp., 547 F.3d 1177 (9th Cir. 2008). In withdrawing its opinion, the Ninth Circuit asked the California Supreme Court to decide the following issues raised in Sullivan:  </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">5bfc6bab-bd6a-429b-8ad6-5bcf88b4a972</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Economic Stimulus Act Provides COBRA Subsidies And New COBRA Election And Disclosure Requirements; DOL Provides Guidance On Defined Benefit Funding Disclosures</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Economic-Stimulus-Act-Provides-COBRA-Subsidies-And-New</link>
      <description>As predicted, 2009 is continuing to be an unusually busy year in the employee benefits field. The first few weeks of February have already yielded two important new developments. First, the Obama Administration's Economic Stimulus Act provides a temporary COBRA subsidy intended to help unemployed workers and their families afford continuation health coverage. This subsidy, however, comes with a potential economic burden for employers and also increases the complexity of COBRA administration. Second, the Department of Labor ("DOL") has issued guidance on the defined benefit plan annual funding disclosure requirements mandated by the Pension Protection Act of 2006 ("PPA"). Model disclosures provided by the DOL are intended to inform defined benefit plan participants about the extent to which their plan is sufficiently funded to meet potential retirement benefit obligations. Both the Stimulus Act amendments to COBRA and the new DOL notices necessitate employer and plan action within the next few ...</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">e4c73016-742f-4031-a5f7-2bd2f7fd194b</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Employee Benefits Update</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Employee-Benefits-1352157</link>
      <description>All three branches of the Government have been busy in the employee benefits field in early 2009, taking actions that will necessarily complicate the tasks of plan administration and legal compliance going forward. The Supreme Court has redefined how plans will have to deal with benefit waivers and QDROs, Congress has added new ERISA requirements while passing child health care legislation, and the Obama Administration has put a hold on regulations that would have provided important guidance under ERISA's reporting, disclosure and prohibited transaction provisions. All this, and the economic stimulus bill (which is likely to contain significant employee benefits provisions) is yet to come! Because the actions described below have already occurred in 2009 and will likely require immediate action on the part of employers, plan sponsors and insurance companies, we are publishing this alert now rather than waiting for the passage of the stimulus package. We will, of ...</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">e510fe83-8b06-4435-9558-0264ca0937c6</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Supreme Court Weighs in on Plan Documents Rule and Effect of Non-QDRO Divorce Decree on Retirement Benefits</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Supreme-Court-Weighs-in-on-Plan-Documents-Rule-and-Effect</link>
      <description>On January 26, 2009, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 9-0 decision, ruled in Kennedy v. Plan Administrator for DuPont Savings and Investment Plan that the terms of the plan documents will trump an otherwise valid state-court order waiving entitlement to benefits. The Court held that, although ERISA did not prevent a plan beneficiary from waiving entitlement to plan benefits through a general waiver, such a waiver is unenforceable against an ERISA plan where the waiver does not comply with the plan's provisions for changing or altering beneficiary designations. </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">2c6815a7-d24a-44c4-b4c2-ccdafdb0c8da</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Children's Health Insurance Law Amends ERISA To Impose New Special Enrollment Periods And Notice Requirements</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Children-s-Health-Insurance-Law-Amends-ERISA-To-Impose-New</link>
      <description>The Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2009 ("CHIPS Act") (H.R. 2, Pub. Law 111-3) was signed into law by President Obama on February 4, 2009. The CHIPS Act, which takes effect on April 1, 2009, extends health coverage to millions of uninsured children. In addition, the CHIPS Act also amends ERISA, the Internal Revenue Code, and the Public Health Service Act to require a new special enrollment period under group health plans, as well as to impose new disclosure requirements on group health plans. </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">e9a513a1-a576-42b2-88d9-9ead1a2595fb</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Obama Administration Issues Pro-Union Executive Orders</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Obama-Administration-Issues-Pro-Union-Executive</link>
      <description>One day after signing the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, on Friday January 30, 2009 President Obama issued three Executive Orders that signal a significant shift in federal labor policy. The Executive Orders, issued in connection with the President's announcement of the formation of the White House Task Force on Middle Class Working Families, expressly noted the need for "strong labor unions" to support a strong middle class, and the "need to level the playing field for workers and the unions that represent their interests." </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">5ade5a1f-98d2-400d-bbf0-168d83d01f8a</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Good News For California Employers - PAGA Does Not Provide A Second Bite At The Apple</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Good-News-For-California-Employers-PAGA-Does-Not-Provide-A</link>
      <description>Shutting down a fledgling cottage industry before it could pick up much steam, the recent California Court of Appeal decision in Deleon v. Verizon Wireless held that a separate Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (PAGA) action may not be brought seeking penalties under the Labor Code when the underlying wage-and-hour claims have already been dismissed with prejudice via a class action settlement. </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">c5f37754-8409-4562-aba0-a8ff79614d47</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Ledbetter Legislation Enacted – Now What?</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Ledbetter-Legislation-Enacted-Now-What</link>
      <description>Today, President Obama signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act ("Ledbetter Act") into law making it the first piece of legislation the President signed in his new administration. The law overturns the highly publicized Supreme Court decision, Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire &amp; Rubber Co., 550 U.S. 618 (2007), which required an affected employee to file a claim within 180 or 300 days (depending on whether their state has a fair employment agency) of the actual alleged discriminatory decision. The Ledbetter Act amends Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 to allow an employee to file a charge for discrimination in pay within 180 or 300 days of the date when the employee is affected by a discriminatory wage decision or practice. </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">23e16603-11f8-4cbf-9579-609feeff4303</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>New Law Provides Pension Funding Relief And Other Measures In Response To Economic Crisis</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/New-Law-Provides-Pension-Funding-Relief-And-Other-Measures</link>
      <description>The Worker, Retiree, and Employer Recovery Act of 2008 ("WRERA") ( H.R. 7327, Pub. Law 110-458), which passed both the House and the Senate unanimously, was signed into law by President Bush on December 23, 2008. WRERA makes numerous technical corrections to the Pension Protection Act of 2006 ("PPA") and also contains several sections providing specific pension-related relief in response to the current economic crisis. In general, the economic-relief provisions are designed to provide plans and participants with methods for dealing with large losses to plan accounts or plan assets due to the market turbulence of 2008.  </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">822977eb-e393-4828-a582-da8d9ddff05f</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Three WARNings for Employers Facing Layoffs Or Bankruptcy in 2009</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Three-WARNings-for-Employers-Facing-Layoffs-Or-Bankruptcy</link>
      <description>As 2009 approaches, the worsening economy will force many employers to downsize, relocate, and, in some cases, contemplate bankruptcy. These decisions will trigger obligations under a variety of laws, including the federal and state1 Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification ("WARN") Acts. </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">44552a1e-2086-4b6b-b03a-ca0422199246</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Employee Benefits Year-End Round-Up</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Employee-Benefits-Year-End-Round</link>
      <description>Employee Benefits issues were prominent in 2008, and as the year draws to a close, it is a good time both to remind everyone of pending compliance deadlines for new DOL and IRS requirements and to draw attention to recent legislation and judicial decisions that likely will have important ramifications in 2009 and beyond. </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">5971a13a-01a3-45c6-b051-c1c6bace7f22</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Expansions of Coverage Requirements for Group Health Plans Under Recently Enacted Laws</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Expansions-of-Coverage-Requirements-for-Group-Health-Plans</link>
      <description>On October 3, 2008, President Bush signed into law the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 ("EESA"). Subtitle B of the EESA contains the Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 ("MHPAEA"), which amends the mental health parity provisions in ERISA, the Public Health Service Act and the Internal Revenue Code to both eliminate the sunset provision under which those existing provisions would have expired on December 31, 2008, as well as to add new requirements regarding mental health and substance use disorder benefits. Apart from the elimination of the sunset provision, the MHPAEA applies for plans years beginning after October 3, 2009 (i.e., for plans with a calendar-year plan year, January 1, 2010). (A special rule for plans maintained pursuant to a collective bargaining agreement may act to extend this effective date for such plans.) </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">e2c33124-6cf9-4e42-8aee-c9ada05a1d42</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Ninth Circuit Holds that San Francisco Health Care Security Ordinance is Not Preempted by ERISA</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Ninth-Circuit-Holds-that-San-Francisco-Health-Care</link>
      <description>Despite the interest in health care reform expressed by both Presidential candidates in the recent election, federal health care reform is still a long way off. States and local governments have, therefore, begun acting to fill this void. The City of San Francisco entered this arena in July 2006, by adopting its Health Care Security Ordinance (the "Ordinance"). The Ordinance has two major components: First, it establishes a city-administered health care program that prioritizes services for low and moderate income persons within the city limits (persons who live outside of the city may be entitled to establish a medical reimbursement account with the city). Second, it requires all covered employers (those with at least 20 employees or non-profit corporations with at least fifty employees) to make a level of health care expenditures of between $1.17 and $1.76 per hour (depending on several factors) for each covered employee (generally speaking, those ...</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">8bf8e66a-49c0-4439-a901-bb45b3a9d17e</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Revised FMLA Regulations Clarify Employer Obligations</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Revised-FMLA-Regulations-Clarify-Employer</link>
      <description>The Department of Labor (DOL) has published its much anticipated Final Rule, revising existing regulations interpreting the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (FMLA). The revised regulations also interpret the National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2008 (NDAA), which earlier this year extended FMLA protections to "military caregivers" and "qualifying exigency leaves." The Final Rule, which spans 750 pages, is effective January 16, 2009. </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">9231a53e-6529-4e5d-a2fb-1b4ee2a2051d</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>The District of Columbia's New Paid Sick Leave Law Goes Into Effect This Week</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/The-District-of-Columbia-s-New-Paid-Sick-Leave-Law-Goes</link>
      <description>Beginning this week, employers in Washington, D.C. are required to provide paid sick and "safe" leave benefits to their employees. In May, 2008, the District of Columbia passed the Accrued Sick and Safe Leave Act of 2008 ("Act"). Employers must comply with the Act's requirements by November 13, 2008.  </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">1640f479-5485-4dbd-b259-8fdbdf347f0b</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Is "Card Check" In Your Future?</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Is-Card-Check-In-Your-Future</link>
      <description>On Tuesday the nation elected a new president. On Wednesday organized labor took credit. Union leaders used the election results to renew their call for legislation that would dramatically change the rules of engagement in U.S. labor-management relations. Some version of what we call "card check" legislation is likely to be the principal labor/employment legislative priority of President Obama's administration.  </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">a0636d6a-6c18-4ab2-ae4c-f9302011f53a</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>After the California Supreme Court Grants Review Of Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior Court, the Department of Labor Standards Enforcement Issues Memo Setting Forth Meal Break Enforcement Policy</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/After-the-California-Supreme-Court-Grants-Review-Of</link>
      <description>The California Supreme Court announced that it will review the Court of Appeal's decision in Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior Court, Swiftly thereafter, the California Department of Labor Standards Enforcement ("DLSE") issued a new memo setting forth its enforcement policy concerning meal periods.
 </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">96ff7098-912e-4124-8f1f-0714e5b65138</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>ADA Amendments Act Rejects Supreme Court Decisions Limiting Scope of ADA</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/ADA-Amendments-Act-Rejects-Supreme-Court-Decisions</link>
      <description>The ADA Amendments Act, passed by the Senate on September 11, 2008 and by the House of Representatives on September 17, 2008, is expected to be signed into law by President Bush. It will become effective January 1, 2009. If signed, the law will expand protections offered by the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") by overruling two Supreme Court decisions that some believe have restricted the protections of the ADA to a more narrow group of individuals than Congress intended. The major features of the Amendments Act, which embody compromises negotiated among the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, other business groups, and the disability community, are summarized below. </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">5047ed71-f918-43f3-9469-93f4ec77e573</guid>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Sep 2011 18:14:17 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>California Supreme Court Leaves Intact Broad Prohibitions On Enforceability Of Non-compete Agreements</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/California-Supreme-Court-Leaves-Intact-Broad-Prohibitions</link>
      <description>On August 7, 2008, the California Supreme Court issued its opinion in Edwards v. Arthur Andersen, LLP, putting to rest the question of whether limited or so-called "narrow-restraint" employee non-compete agreements were permissible under California law. </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">e3730508-16c6-4350-8337-0b700397e7de</guid>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2011 17:38:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <title>Anxiously-Awaited Brinker Decision Holds That Employers Need Not Police Whether Employees Take Meal Periods</title>
      <link>http://www.crowell.com/NewsEvents/AlertsNewsletters/Labor-Employment-Law-Alert-US/Anxiously-Awaited-em-Brinker-em-Decision-Holds-That</link>
      <description>On July 22, 2008, the Fourth District California Court of Appeal issued its long-awaited revised decision in Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior Court. The Brinker matter came to the Fourth District on appeal from a class certification order, in which the trial court granted certification for a class of employees "who have not been provided with meal and rest breaks in accordance with California law. . . ." Defendant Brinker Restaurant Corp. ("Brinker") argued against certification, contending that meal and rest periods need only be provided, not enforced, and that whether Brinker employees took their meal and rest breaks thus became a "hopelessly individualized" inquiry not amenable to class treatment. The trial court, however, explicitly granted class certification without resolving the legal question of how much Brinker Restaurant Corp. must do to "provide" meal and rest periods to comply with the Labor Code. The question before the Court of Appeal ...</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
