A recent decision by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals illustrates one of the many challenges in showing discrimination.
It has been said that there is a fine line between genius and insanity – both are marked by their ability to see connections where others see only differences.
On February 10, 2014, the Department of the Treasury issued final regulations on the Employer Shared Responsibility Payment that would require large employers to face tax penalties for not offering affordable health coverage to full-time employees.
How much deference should courts give to interpretive guidance of the New York Department of Labor? We’ll soon find out, as the Second Circuit has certified the question to the New York Court of Appeals.
On February 5, 2014, the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) re-issued its controversial “quickie” election rule. As you may recall, that rule, which was opposed by employer groups, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and others, was invalidated by the D.C. District Court in May 2012.
Long before the ACA was a Senate cloakroom concept, the IRS had a burr under its saddle about employee misclassification, because payroll withholding tax collections vary directly with W-2 employee payrolls.
As we previously noted, last week’s post Do We Live in a Society Where “Blessing” Someone is Religious Harassment? has generated a fair amount of debate. Some of the debate has skipped straight to whether this would amount to harassment as defined by Title VII.
Do you know how much keeping former employees in your defined benefit plan costs?
On December 4, 2013, the Ontario government introduced the Strong Workplaces for a Stronger Economy Act, 2013 (Bill 146), aimed at increasing protection for workers the Ministry of Labour considers particularly vulnerable.
My good friend, Jon Hyman of the Ohio Employer’s Law Blog, probably said it best this morning…