Welcome to Employment Law This Week®! Subscribe to our channel for new episodes every Monday!

1. Legislation Introduced to Encourage Mobility

Our top story: New legislation was introduced in Congress on employee mobility. Congressional Democrats have introduced bills in both houses targeting practices that curb competition between employers for workers. The legislation would effectively ban no-poaching agreements, which are, in most cases, already considered a criminal antitrust violation by the Department of Justice. But the bills go further to ban anti-competitive corporate mergers and prohibit non-compete agreements, except in limited circumstances. Jonathan Brenner, from Epstein Becker Green, has more:

“Undoubtedly, the new legislation would require many employers to fairly significantly retool their employee hiring and onboarding practices, and their contracts that are in use with many of their employees. Another impact is in the enforcement area, as the new law apparently would give new enforcement powers to the federal Department of Labor for the prohibited activities. Right now, government fines, investigations, and audits are not things that employers have to contemplate with this kind of activity. The proposed legislation does not have bipartisan sponsorship. It has only been introduced by Democrats at this point. That could change, of course, but unless it does, the prospects for passage may be slim.”

2. California Implements “ABC Test” for Independent Contractors

California changes its test for independent contractors. The California Supreme Court has adopted the so-called “ABC test,” which is used in some other jurisdictions, for determining whether a worker is an independent contractor or an employee. California workers will now be presumed to be employees unless an employer can establish otherwise using the three-pronged test. California businesses that utilize independent contractors should review those relationships in light of the change. To keep up with federal and state-level wage and hour changes, download Epstein Becker Green’s app, the Wage and Hour Guide for Employers.

For more, click here: https://bit.ly/2HSSQIJ

3. Emails About Employment Conditions Protected Under the NLRA Despite Profanity

Emails among employees about the terms and conditions of employment remain protected by the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”), despite the use of profanity. A National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) panel found that a restaurant in New York City violated the NLRA by firing four employees after a group email criticized some company employment practices and policies. The employer contended that the employees’ actions were not protected by the NLRA because the message contained profanity. The NLRB disagreed and held that the email does not lose protection under the NLRA because of profanity, and that the employees were entitled to reinstatement and back pay.

4. Ninth Circuit: Clock Starts After Receipt of Notice for Title VII Suits

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit sets the clock on suits under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”). Title VII lays out a 90-day time limit for filing civil action suits once an employee receives a right-to-sue letter. Here, a barbershop employee filed sexual harassment and retaliation charges against her former employer. At issue was whether the 90-day clock began when the plaintiff received a right-to-sue notice from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission or when she became eligible to receive one. The Ninth Circuit reversed a lower court’s decision, finding that the clock starts upon actual receipt of the notice.

5. Tip of the Week

Carolyn Rincon, Senior Employment Counsel for Marsh & McLennan Companies, shares some tips on evaluating whether to bring discovery in-house.

Visit EmploymentLawThisWeek.com

These materials have been provided for informational purposes only and are not intended and should not be construed to constitute legal advice. The “Tip of the Week” offers one perspective on possible human resource ideas or business practices. It presents the perspective of an individual not affiliated with Epstein Becker Green and should not be considered legal advice. The content of these materials is copyrighted to Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. EMPLOYMENT LAW THIS WEEK® is a registered trademark of Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. ATTORNEY ADVERTISING.

New Jersey passes sweeping equal pay legislation. Governor Murphy has signed what some claim are the strongest equal pay restrictions in the country. The new legislation amends the state’s Law Against Discrimination to prohibit employers from paying members of a protected class less than other employees for substantially similar work. The legislation allows employees in those protected classes to recoup up to six years of back pay and prohibits employers from taking action against employees who discuss wages. Denise Dadika, from Epstein Becker Green, has more.

This is an extended interview from Employment Law This Week® (Episode 115: Week of April 30, 2018), an online series by Epstein Becker Green. youtu.be/C4roMH2Ru6g

Visit EmploymentLawThisWeek.com.

These materials have been provided for informational purposes only and are not intended and should not be construed to constitute legal advice. The content of these materials is copyrighted to Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. EMPLOYMENT LAW THIS WEEK® is a registered trademark of Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. ATTORNEY ADVERTISING.

Lenora Billings-Harris, Diversity Strategist for Ubuntu Global, is back with advice on enhancing intentional inclusion in the workplace.

This is a "Tip of the Week" segment from Employment Law This Week® (Episode 115: Week of April 30, 2018), an online series by Epstein Becker Green. youtu.be/C4roMH2Ru6g

Visit EmploymentLawThisWeek.com.

These materials have been provided for informational purposes only and are not intended and should not be construed to constitute legal advice. The “Tip of the Week” offers one perspective on possible human resource ideas or business practices. It presents the perspective of an individual not affiliated with Epstein Becker Green and should not be considered legal advice. The content of these materials is copyrighted to Epstein Becker & Green, P.C.

Welcome to Employment Law This Week®! Subscribe to our channel for new episodes every Monday!

1. New Jersey Passes Diane B. Allen Equal Pay Act

Our top story - New Jersey passes sweeping equal pay legislation. Governor Murphy has signed what some claim are the strongest equal pay restrictions in the country. The new legislation amends the state’s Law Against Discrimination to prohibit employers from paying members of a protected class less than other employees for substantially similar work. The legislation allows employees in those protected classes to recoup up to six years of back pay and prohibits employers from taking action against employees who discuss wages. Denise Dadika, from Epstein Becker Green, has more:

“It is broader than the federal Equal Pay Act and many state laws including New York, which limit the protections to sex. New Jersey law requires that employers provide equal compensation and benefits for substantially similar work. This is another departure from the federal law, which requires equal pay for equal work. Employers should work with legal counsel to conduct privileged pay equity studies to identify any wage differentials and to determine whether they can justify those wage differentials under New Jersey's law. In the event that they find unresolved pay differences, once the Act is in effect they can not correct those by lowering the wage of the higher earner.”

2. Eleventh Circuit: Plaintiffs Can “Opt In” to FLSA Suits

The Eleventh Circuit says individuals can choose to become plaintiffs when an FLSA collective action is not certified - The three-judge panel rejected a district court's ruling that three dancers did not qualify as parties because the original lead plaintiff lost her bid for conditional class certification. Because the three dancers filed written consents to join the suit, and because the lower court did not determine they were not similarly situated to the original plaintiff, the court found that their claims should not have been dismissed with prejudice.

3. NLRB GC Robb Suggests Change to Election Rule

NLRB General Counsel Peter Robb weighs in on the Board’s 2014 "ambush election" rule - Robb was appointed by President Trump and confirmed last year. He recently suggested increasing the minimum required time between the filing of a petition and a vote on union representation from eight to at least twelve days. Robb also commented that the Board’s regional directors should have the ability to extend hearing dates by an additional three days. The board’s Request for Information on those rules closed on April 18th. Close to 7,000 comments were received.

For more, click here: https://bit.ly/2r4WcBT

4. IRS Issues Guidance on New Tax Credit

The Internal Revenue Service has issued FAQ guidance on the new employer tax credit for paid family and medical leave. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 added the credit for businesses who voluntarily offer paid family and medical leave for employees. To receive the credit, employers must provide at least two weeks a year of paid family and medical leave to all qualifying full-time employees. The guidance defines qualifying employees, explains how the credit is calculated, and clarifies how the credit impacts deductions for wages paid to an employee on leave.

5. Tip of the Week

Lenora Billings-Harris, Diversity Strategist for Ubuntu Global, is back with advice on enhancing intentional inclusion in the workplace.

Visit EmploymentLawThisWeek.com

These materials have been provided for informational purposes only and are not intended and should not be construed to constitute legal advice. The “Tip of the Week” offers one perspective on possible human resource ideas or business practices. It presents the perspective of an individual not affiliated with Epstein Becker Green and should not be considered legal advice. The content of these materials is copyrighted to Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. EMPLOYMENT LAW THIS WEEK® is a registered trademark of Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. ATTORNEY ADVERTISING.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) makes good on its promise to crack down on non-solicitation agreements. The DOJ’s Antitrust Division has entered into a settlement with two of the world’s largest railroad equipment manufacturers, part of the broader antitrust investigations announced by the agency in October 2016. According to the DOJ, the two companies had entered into a no-poaching agreement that “restrained competition for employees.” The civil complaint is the first case brought by the DOJ since its 2016 antitrust guidance statement. In a press release, the DOJ noted that this particular case was a civil one because the agreement ended before the 2016 guidance, but the agency said that it would criminally prosecute any violations that post-dated the guidance. Eddie Loya, a former federal prosecutor and Member of the Firm at Epstein Becker Green, has more.

This is an extended interview from Employment Law This Week® (Episode 114: Week of April 23, 2018), an online series by Epstein Becker Green. youtu.be/EjZvw-L4vQk

Visit EmploymentLawThisWeek.com.

These materials have been provided for informational purposes only and are not intended and should not be construed to constitute legal advice. The content of these materials is copyrighted to Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. EMPLOYMENT LAW THIS WEEK® is a registered trademark of Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. ATTORNEY ADVERTISING.