This week, James Gelfand, Senior VP of Health Policy for The ERISA Industry Committee (“ERIC”), shares some advice on top considerations and improvements for the health savings account (“HSA”) benefit.

This is a "Tip of the Week" segment from Employment Law This Week® (Episode 121: Week of June 18, 2018), an online series by Epstein Becker Green. youtu.be/8D-v5k72Q6c

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. NLRB GC Issues Memo on Workplace Policies

General Counsel Peter Robb has issued a memo to National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB” or “Board”) regional directors that offers guidance in applying the Board’s Boeing decision when considering the legality of rules. Certain policies, including those on civility, will be considered presumptively lawful and enforceable. Others, such as rules banning discussions of compensation, will be treated as unlawful. Robb instructs the regional offices to refer cases when there is uncertainty to the Board’s Division of Advice for direction. Genevieve Murphy-Bradacs, from Epstein Becker Green, has more:

“The General Counsel memo that was issued at the beginning of June provides very specific guidance regarding the placement of work rules into each of the three categories. The memo summarizes each of the three categories of rules. It provides concrete examples of the rules falling into each category and offers a brief analysis of the balancing test applied to each example. What is also significant about the memo is it serves as a reminder as to what has not changed since the Boeing decision. So, it makes clear that work rules that specifically ban protected concerted activity or that are promulgated directly in response to organizing or other protected activity remain unlawful. And it also makes clear that while the maintenance of a particular rule might be lawful, the application of such rules to employees who have engaged in protected activity may violate the act, depending on the particular circumstances.”

2. Proposed Joint-Employer Rule Coming Soon

Joint-employer rulemaking is coming soon. NLRB Chairman John Ring has indicated that the Board majority favors issuing a rule on joint-employer liability. He expects a proposed rule to be issued by the end of the summer. The Board’s December 2017 Hy-Brand decision temporarily overturned the Obama-era Browning-Ferris test for joint-employer status, rejecting its broad “indirect control” standard. Hy-Brand was overturned when it was alleged that Board member William Emanuel had a conflict of interest and should have recused himself. The Board will also review its process for determining conflicts of interest on the part of Board members.

3. New Legislation Eases Disclosure Requirements for Startups

Startups offering equity plans get regulatory relief. The legislation that President Trump signed in May to ease regulations under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act also contained some good news for startups. The law adjusts the Rule 701 thresholds, which allow private companies to offer equity to employees without registering the sales as public offerings. The cap will move from $5 million of securities sold in a 12-month period to $10 million. The legislation also requires the Securities and Exchange Commission to adjust the disclosure threshold for inflation every five years.

4. NJ Senate Advances Ban on Sex Harassment Confidentiality Agreements

The New Jersey Senate wants no more secrecy around harassment claims. On a 34-to-1 vote, the chamber approved legislation banning non-disclosure agreements involving sexual harassment claims. The bill is still pending in the House, where a vote is expected in the next few weeks. The legislation would also allow victims to keep their identities confidential and would establish jurisdiction in Superior Court, arguably bypassing arbitration agreements. Some are concerned that a provision in the bill would be preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act, particularly based on the recent Supreme Court ruling in Epic Systems.

5. Tip of the Week

This week, James Gelfand, Senior VP of Health Policy for The ERISA Industry Committee (“ERIC”), shares some advice on top considerations and improvements for the health savings account (“HSA”) benefit:

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.

On narrow grounds, the Supreme Court of the United States has found in favor of a baker in Colorado who refused an order for a custom wedding cake from a gay couple because of his religious beliefs. The Colorado Civil Rights Commission found that the baker had engaged in unlawful discrimination after he refused to serve a same-sex couple. The high court found that comments by one member of the Colorado Commission showed religious animus that violated the First Amendment’s free exercise clause. The Supreme Court declined to address the delicate balance between a business’s First Amendment rights and statutory protections under anti-discrimination laws, but the issue is likely to be back in court in the near future. Janene Marasciullo, from Epstein Becker Green, has more.

This is an extended interview from Employment Law This Week® (Episode 120: Week of June 11, 2018), an online series by Epstein Becker Green. youtu.be/9XZYxur7n9I

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.

Ann Burns, Chief Human Resources Officer for Higher Logic, shares some tips for providing productive management training.

This is a "Tip of the Week" segment from Employment Law This Week® (Episode 120: Week of June 11, 2018), an online series by Epstein Becker Green. youtu.be/mE7-q5vzWdc

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. SCOTUS Rules for Christian Colorado Baker

Our top story: On narrow grounds, the Supreme Court of the United States has found in favor of a baker in Colorado who refused an order for a custom wedding cake from a gay couple because of his religious beliefs. The Colorado Civil Rights Commission found that the baker had engaged in unlawful discrimination after he refused to serve a same-sex couple. The high court found that comments by one member of the Colorado Commission showed religious animus that violated the First Amendment’s free exercise clause. The Supreme Court declined to address the delicate balance between a business’s First Amendment rights and statutory protections under anti-discrimination laws, but the issue is likely to be back in court in the near future. Janene Marasciullo, from Epstein Becker Green, has more.

2. California Court Addresses Waiting-Time Penalties

The California Court of Appeal says waiting-time penalties apply regardless of whether there was malicious intent. Labor Code Section 203 states that an employer that “willfully fails to pay” any wages after an employee is terminated or quits is responsible for continuous wages until payment is made. In this case, the employer argued that its failure to pay was not willful because it was not aware of a minimum wage hike. But the court determined that ignorance of the law was no excuse and that “willful failure to pay” requires only that an employer act knowingly.

3. Epic Decision Changes Course of Many Cases

The Supreme Court’s Epic decision sends a slew of class action cases into individual arbitrations. In light of its landmark ruling that okayed class waivers in arbitration agreements, the high court has remanded a pending United Healthcare class action case back to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. A Michigan federal court just ruled that workers suing Fiat Chrysler for discrimination will have to take their claims to individual arbitration, and a California federal judge did the same for a class of delivery drivers suing a Domino’s franchisee. Many other cases are being voluntarily removed to arbitration. The Epic ruling applies to an estimated 25 million U.S. employees who are subject to arbitration agreements containing class action waivers.

4. Connecticut and Vermont Adopt Salary History Bans

Two more states say “no” to salary history inquiries by employers. Connecticut and Vermont are the most recent states to prohibit employers from asking applicants about their salary history. Nine states across the country now have salary history bans, including California, Delaware, and New Jersey. The Connecticut law allows applicants to file lawsuits against an employer that inquires about their past compensation. Vermont's law bans salary history questions but allows employers to ask about an applicant's salary expectations or requirements.

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

5. Tip of the Week

Ann Burns, Chief Human Resources Officer for Higher Logic, shares some tips for providing productive management training:

“What manager training can do for all managers is really provide an opportunity for skill building, for an opportunity to look at company policies and procedures, make sure that your managers are aware of what their responsibility is to the company, as well as what their personal liability is in situations, that they act appropriately. Another opportunity is identifying the target management group that you want to do the training for. Some companies will decide that you want to do different levels of training for different groups of people. This year, my company decided to do all managers at the same time, just so we had the opportunity to baseline all managers. We acquired four companies this year in three different states, so we decided providing the opportunity for all managers to come to our headquarters for a two-day workshop was an effective way to kick off the program and meet our goals.”

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.