Workforce Bulletin

On September 30, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit joined the Sixth and Ninth Circuits in their interpretation of the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act’s (EFAA) scope. In Diaz-Roa v. Hermes Law, P.C., the court extended the developing consensus view that a plaintiff who includes a “claim” of sexual assault or sexual harassment in their complaint extends the statute’s invalidation of an existing agreement to arbitrate every claim in the lawsuit—in other words, the entire “case.”

Effective December 13, 2026, New York State will require most private employers to stock their workplaces with opioid antagonists (antidotes), such as naloxone or Narcan.

Part of the “ERISA – You’ll Need a Lawyer for That” series.

On September 8, 2026, the U.S. Department of Labor’s (DOL’s) Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA) issued Field Assistance Bulletin No. 2026-03 (“FAB 2026-03”) and an accompanying compliance resource identifying potential warning signs of Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act (MHPAEA) violations.

On September 30, 2026, the New York State Department of Labor (NYSDOL) issued a proposed rule on the “Prevention of Retail Workplace Violence” prior to the upcoming effective date for the New York Retail Worker Safety Act’s (the “Act”) silent response button provision. Beginning January 1, 2027, the Act will require covered retailers to provide a silent response button, a tool that allows employees to discreetly request immediate assistance during emergencies, as we addressed in a past blog post. The proposed rule provides guidance on what counts as a silent response button under the Act, employer coverage, and other important considerations for New York retail employers.  

The New Jersey Department of Labor (NJDOL) has activated its Employer Response Portal (“Response Portal”). This long-awaited update relates to the July 31, 2023, amendments to the Unemployment Compensation law, which requires employers with employees in the state to report every employee separation electronically to enable faster unemployment benefit determinations.

On August 21, 2026, the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) published three final rules on behalf of the Department of Labor (DOL), formally rescinding longstanding policies to align regulations governing federal contracts with the Administration’s goals. The new rules, respectively, formally rescinded the implementing affirmative action regulations of Executive Order (EO) 11246, and significantly changed portions of Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act and the Vietnam Era Veterans’ Readjustment Assistance Act (VEVRAA).

A recent decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit provides an important reminder that an employer’s exposure to a retaliation claim can arise even after it has already made a lawful decision to terminate an employee.

In Russo v. New Hampshire Neurospine Institute, P.A., No. 25-1519 (1st Cir. Aug. 25, 2026), the First Circuit affirmed summary judgment for an employer on an employee’s sex discrimination claim, but reinstated her retaliation claim. The court concluded that, although the employer had decided to terminate the employee before her attorney sent a demand letter alleging discrimination on her behalf, a jury could find that subsequent changes to the terms and timing of her separation were retaliatory.

Part of the “ERISA – You’ll Need a Lawyer for That” series.

On July 23, 2026, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) proposed a new rule (the “Proposed Rule”) that would offer group health plan administrators an additional safe harbor for electronically furnishing required group health plan disclosures to participants and beneficiaries.

On July 10, 2026, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors amended the Fair Chance Ordinance (FCO), placing additional restrictions and requirements on employers who make employment decisions based on criminal history (the “Amendment”). The Amendment took effect on August 10, 2026. The Amendment prohibits employers from taking adverse action based on out-of-state criminal history related to conduct that is lawful in California, including abortion-related health care, drag performances, gender-affirming care, and spontaneous abortion. The Amendment also requires employers to take additional steps prior to issuing adverse action based on criminal history and increases the administrative penalty for violations and the amount of liquidated damages available in a lawsuit.

The Massachusetts PROTECT Act (Chapter 163 of the Acts of 2026), signed by Governor Healey on August 5, 2026, is aimed at keeping federal immigration enforcement out of “sensitive places,” including courthouses, schools, child care centers and health care facilities.  The Act also created an immediate compliance obligation for employers with employees working in Massachusetts.