1. New York home care agencies typically pay sleep-in home health aides for 13 hours per day, relying on a 2010 opinion from the state Department of Labor. Two home health attendants who claimed they did not “live in” the homes of their clients filed suit against their employers, claiming that their patients’ need for 24-hour supervision required them to be working or on call for all 24 hours. They argued that they should have been paid the minimum wage for each hour. A state appellate court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, finding that the 13-hour rule violates the state's minimum wage law. The Department of Health is currently reviewing the decision. Mike McGahan, from Epstein Becker Green, has more.

    “The highest court in the state is the Court of Appeals, so appeals still may be taken to that court. Two federal courts in New York this year have ruled on the identical issue and found that the opinion letter of the Department of Labor was entitled to deference, because it did not conflict with the underlying minimum wage order. Now, those decisions may not be binding on the Court of Appeals, but perhaps the reasoning in them will influence the outcome of the case on appeal.”

    For more, read Mr. McGahan’s recent blog post: ebglaw.com/eltw88-heal

    This is an extended interview from Employment Law This Week® (Episode 88: Week of September 25, 2017), an online series by Epstein Becker Green. youtube.com/watch?v=u9DMVmKHiEY

    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.

    # vimeo.com/235076266 Uploaded 0 Plays 0 Comments
  2. Welcome to Employment Law This Week®! Subscribe to our channel for new episodes every Monday!

    (1) Miscimarra Signals Surge in NLRB Rulings

    Our top story: NLRB Chairman Philip Miscimarra signals an upcoming surge in decisions from the Labor Board as his term winds down. Speaking at Epstein Becker Green's Annual Workforce Management Briefing, Miscimarra noted the NLRB traditionally strives to issue its decisions in cases in which a departing Board has participated before the member’s term concludes. In Chairman Miscimarra’s case, that will be December 16th of this year.

    (2) Another 24-Hour Wage Hour Decision for the Home Health Care Industry

    New York home care agencies typically pay sleep-in home health aides for 13 hours per day, relying on a 2010 opinion from the state Department of Labor. Two home health attendants who claimed they did not “live in” the homes of their clients filed suit against their employers, claiming that their patients’ need for 24-hour supervision required them to be working or on call for all 24 hours. They argued that they should have been paid the minimum wage for each hour. A state appellate court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, finding that the 13-hour rule violates the state's minimum wage law. The Department of Health is currently reviewing the decision. Mike McGahan, from Epstein Becker Green, has more:

    “The highest court in the state is the Court of Appeals, so appeals still may be taken to that court. Two federal courts in New York this year have ruled on the identical issue and found that the opinion letter of the Department of Labor was entitled to deference, because it did not conflict with the underlying minimum wage order. Now, those decisions may not be binding on the Court of Appeals, but perhaps the reasoning in them will influence the outcome of the case on appeal.”

    For more, read Mr. McGahan’s recent blog post: ebglaw.com/eltw88-heal

    (3) California Lawmakers Pass Immigrant Worker Protection Act

    New legislation in California around workplace ICE visits: State lawmakers recently passed the Immigrant Worker Protection Act, a series of regulations detailing employer obligations when dealing with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents. The law bars employers from allowing ICE officials to enter their workplaces without a warrant. It also requires employers to receive a subpoena before sharing confidential employee information with agents. The bill will now proceed to Governor Brown for his signature or veto.

    For more, read our recent blog post: ebglaw.com/eltw88-mm

    (4) California Nears Expansion of Equal Pay Protections

    California's strict pay equity laws are about to get even stricter: Three bills that would build significantly on the California Fair Pay Act have just passed in the state legislature. One would clarify that the Act applies to both private and public employers; another would prohibit employers from asking applicants about their salary history; and the third bill focuses on gender pay differentials. It would require employers with 500 or more employees to submit pay data for overtime-exempt male and female employees and board members. The information must be submitted to the Secretary of State by July 2020 and then again every two years, and the results will be published on a public website. The Governor has yet to indicate whether he will sign the bills into law.

    For more, read our recent Act Now Advisory: ebglaw.com/news/californias-proposed-wage-shaming-law-is-another-mess/

    (5) Tip of the Week

    New York City has new legislation about to take effect that will bar employers from asking about salary history. The law goes into effect on October 31, 2017. Dana Sussman, Deputy Commissioner for Policy and Intergovernmental Affairs for the New York City Commission on Human Rights, offers some best practices for complying with the city’s new salary history law.

    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.

    # vimeo.com/235063298 Uploaded 2 Plays 0 Comments
  3. Nausheen Rokerya, Associate General Counsel, Labor & Employment, for Visiting Nurse Service of New York, offers some advice on what to do in light of recent employee arbitration agreement decisions. This includes most recently the Gold decision in New York, which found class action waivers to be unenforceable:

    “New York employers sitting in Manhattan and the Bronx are bound by the Gold decision, and so they should carefully consider the likely impact it will have on litigation strategy of plaintiffs' attorneys. First, plaintiffs' lawyers are unlikely to file FLSA complaints in federal court, where Second Circuit precedent finding class action waivers enforceable is still binding. At the same time, we do expect to see an uptick in state court filings, where plaintiffs' lawyers are likely to seek to nullify class action waivers, making it nearly impossible for employers to then rely on those waivers to defeat class certification. While the Gold decision is current law in Manhattan and the Bronx, the U.S. Supreme Court is actually scheduled to hear oral argument on this very issue on October 2. We do expect the [Supreme] Court's decision to resolve the current split among the federal courts sometime in early 2018.”

    This is a "Tip of the Week" segment from Employment Law This Week® (Episode 87: Week of September 18, 2017), an online series by Epstein Becker Green. youtu.be/trXUq_taCAU

    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.

    # vimeo.com/234060001 Uploaded 0 Plays 0 Comments
  4. Welcome to Employment Law This Week®! Subscribe to our channel for new episodes every Monday!

    (1) D.C. Policy Update from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce

    Our top story: A progress report on labor and employment policy from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Marc Freedman is the Executive Director of Labor Law Policy for the Chamber. We caught up with him at Epstein Becker Green’s Annual Workforce Management Briefing to find out how things are shaping up at the Department of Labor (DOL), the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) under the new administration:

    (2) DOL Wage and Hour Division Administrator Nominated

    President Trump has nominated Cheryl Stanton as the new Administrator of the DOL’s Wage and Hour Division, a position that has been vacant since the President took office in January. Stanton is currently Executive Director of the South Carolina Department of Employment and Workforce, and, during her tenure, the Department reportedly paid off a debt of nearly $1 billion to the federal government. Before that, she was an employment lawyer with Ogletree, a position she returned to after serving as Associate White House Counsel under President George W. Bush.

    (3) Ninth Circuit: DOL's 80/20 Rule Does Not Deserve Deference

    The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit found that the DOL is not entitled to deference on a tip-credit policy. The Ninth Circuit ruled on nine consolidated cases in which employees claimed that a tip credit was improperly applied to times during which they performed non-tipped work. The plaintiffs relied on the Wage and Hour Division’s Field Operations Handbook, which interprets a Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) regulation on “dual jobs.” The guidance stated that employees must be paid full minimum wage for non-tipped work if that work exceeds more than 20 percent of their hours in a workweek. Creating a split with the Eighth Circuit, the Ninth Circuit found that the DOL's 80/20 rule is an attempt to “create a de facto new regulation” and does not deserve deference.

    (5) Tip of the Week

    Nausheen Rokerya, Associate General Counsel, Labor & Employment, for Visiting Nurse Service of New York, offers some advice on what to do in light of recent employee arbitration agreement decisions. This includes most recently the Gold decision in New York, which found class action waivers to be unenforceable:

    “New York employers sitting in Manhattan and the Bronx are bound by the Gold decision, and so they should carefully consider the likely impact it will have on litigation strategy of plaintiffs' attorneys. First, plaintiffs' lawyers are unlikely to file FLSA complaints in federal court, where Second Circuit precedent finding class action waivers enforceable is still binding. At the same time, we do expect to see an uptick in state court filings, where plaintiffs' lawyers are likely to seek to nullify class action waivers, making it nearly impossible for employers to then rely on those waivers to defeat class certification. While the Gold decision is current law in Manhattan and the Bronx, the U.S. Supreme Court is actually scheduled to hear oral argument on this very issue on October 2. We do expect the [Supreme] Court's decision to resolve the current split among the federal courts sometime in early 2018.”

    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.

    # vimeo.com/234057866 Uploaded 0 Plays 0 Comments
  5. New pay data collection requirements are put on hold. A division of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has issued an immediate stay on new EEO-1 reporting requirements announced in 2016 under the previous administration. Under the rule, federal contractors and private employers with 100 or more employees would have been required to gather information on employee pay and hours worked by race, ethnicity, and sex, and grouped by occupational category. Susan Gross Sholinsky, from Epstein Becker Green, has more:

    “The revised EEO-1 report is not actually rescinded. However, it will be stayed until the [Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)] submits a new information collection package. It's unlikely, though, that that will happen, because Acting EEOC Chair Victoria Lipnic has actually opposed the revised EEO-1 report from the beginning. And she recently said publicly that she hopes the OMB's decision prompts discussions of more effective ways to encourage employers to review compensation practices in order to ensure equal pay and to close the wage gap. The filing deadline, which used to be September 30th, is now March 31st, and the window for selecting a representative pay period used to be between July 1st and September 30th. It's now between October 1st and December 31st, as had been suggested in the revised EEO-1 report.”

    For more, click here: http://bit.ly/2gONNwE

    This is a "Tip of the Week" segment from Employment Law This Week® (Episode 86: Week of September 12, 2017), an online series by Epstein Becker Green. youtu.be/8S-_h0F-q0w

    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.

    # vimeo.com/233382006 Uploaded 0 Plays 0 Comments

Employment Law This Week®

Epstein Becker Green PRO

Welcome to Employment Law This Week®, presented by Epstein Becker Green. This online video program – among the first of its kind in the legal industry – will deliver the most significant stories and developments in employment, labor, and workforce management…


+ More

Welcome to Employment Law This Week®, presented by Epstein Becker Green. This online video program – among the first of its kind in the legal industry – will deliver the most significant stories and developments in employment, labor, and workforce management issues in about five minutes, each week.

Tune in each week for developments that may affect your business. Learn more at ebglaw.com/employment-law-this-week/

Browse This Channel

Shout Box

Heads up: the shoutbox will be retiring soon. It’s tired of working, and can’t wait to relax. You can still send a message to the channel owner, though!

Channels are a simple, beautiful way to showcase and watch videos. Browse more Channels.