10.30.20242024 Election: How Labor Law Could Shift Under Trump or Harris LeadershipThe Presidential Election is upon us with many indicators predicting a close election. The two candidates and their respective party platforms offer opposing views on many major issues. While some issues play more prominently in the press than others, issues related to Labor Law feature two vastly divergent approaches. Since President Trump already has a track record on federal labor policy and Vice President Harris signals support for President Biden’s labor policy, here are three areas in Labor Law that will be sensitive to who takes the oath of office on January 20, 2025.
10.24.2024FTC Rule On Non-Competes Is Bruised But Not Yet Beaten As FTC Appeals, While NLRB Continues To Challenge Non-CompetesIn April 2024, the FTC issued a Rule declaring invalid most existing non-compete agreements and prohibiting most employers from entering into new non-compete agreements after September 3, 2024, with few exceptions. Three lawsuits were filed challenging the FTC Rule - - two in Texas and one in Philadelphia. The Philadelphia lawsuit resulted in the court’s denying a motion to stay enforcement of the Rule on July 23, 2024. Judge Hodge then set a deadline of September 20, 2024 for the plaintiff, ATS Tree Service, to file a motion for summary judgment, a deadline that was extended twice. On October 4, ATS withdrew its Complaint, thereby ending this challenge and any right to appeal.
10.08.2024Should I Stay Or Should I Go: The NLRB Weighs InOn October 7, 2024, NLRB General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo announced to her staff and the public that she intends to prosecute employers for “Stay-or-Pay” employment agreements, agreements that require a new employee to repay outlays for training if the employee leaves within a certain timeframe after being hired. The General Counsel reasons that such provisions are “presumptively unlawful” under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act, which protects the rights to unionize or engage in protected concerted activity, because they force employees to remain in jobs they would otherwise leave, or deter an employee from union activity so as not to risk termination and the repayment obligation.
06.25.2024SCOTUS Requires NLRB to Meet Traditional Standards for Preliminary Injunctive Relief On June 13 the U.S. Supreme Court heightened the standard a court must apply to an NLRB request for a preliminary injunction against an employer accused of violating federal labor law. In resolving a circuit split in which courts applied different tests in determining when to grant preliminary injunctive relief, the Court held that district courts should apply the traditional, four-pronged test in determining whether to grant a preliminary injunction under Section 10(j) of the National Labor Relations Act (Act). Starbucks Corp. v. McKinney.
06.21.2024The NLRB Gives An Employee Four Strikes And He's Still Not Out The National Labor Relations Act gives employees the right to engage in activities together with and on behalf of their co-workers to improve working conditions, called protected concerted activity. The question frequently arises as to the outer bounds of this right. How far can an employee take the cause?
08.10.2023NLRB Applies a Shifting Burdens Analysis in Reviewing Employer Work Rules; Boeing OverruledOn August 2, 2023, the NLRB further limited employers’ flexibility in designing work rules by holding that all work rules will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis, and no work rules will get an automatic pass. The Board’s 3-1 decision in Stericycle Inc. holds that once the NLRB General Counsel proves that a work rule could chill employees’ exercise of Section 7 rights, there is a presumption that the rule is unlawful, which the employer can rebut only with proof that the work rule serves a lawful business interest, the rule advances the lawful interest, and a more narrowly tailored rule would not advance the interest.
06.27.2023New York Assembly Passes Bill to Ban Non-Compete AgreementsOn June 20, 2023, the New York State Assembly passed a bill (A1278B) to make non-compete agreements unlawful. The New York State Senate previously passed the bill’s counterpart (S3100A). The bills aim to prohibit non-compete agreements and authorize covered individuals to bring a civil action against employers alleged to have violated the bills’ provisions. The bills make clear that they would ban non-competes entered into or modified after the effective date. If signed by Governor Kathy Hochul, the bills would come into effect 30 days after being signed into law. While the business community reacted with shock and anger at the bills, the proposed bills in New York follow the nationwide trend against non-competes that we have been tracking for the past several years.
02.24.2023NLRB Places NDAs and Non-Disparagement Agreements with Rank and File Employees in its Cross-HairsOn February 21, 2023, in McLaren Macomb, 372 NLRB No. 58, the NLRB made a broadside attack on precedent and confidentiality and non-disparagement provisions in severance agreements signed by rank and file employees. This far-reaching decision calls into question the enforceability of standard severance and employment agreement provisions entered into with statutory employees going forward.
09.08.2021Stepping In Where Unions Have Failed, NYC Council Imposes Just Cause Standard On Non-Union EmployersAs our readers may be aware, in March 2021, New York City passed an ordinance requiring fast food employers to have just cause to discharge their employees, where discharge includes termination, constructive discharge, indefinite suspension, and reduction in hours by more than 15%. The ordinance has been effective as of July 5, 2021, and enforcement of these mandates began September 3, 2021.
This website uses cookies for site operation, security and analytics purposes, as described in our Privacy Notice and Cookie Notice. By clicking Ok, you are agreeing to our use of cookies.
OK
