Companies that work with the federal government (think government contracts, grant funding, and Medicare and Medicaid reimbursements) need to stay up to date on the federal False Claims Act (FCA). Employee whistleblowers continue to use the FCA as one of their prime tools to bring actions against their employers. In 2019, whistleblowers filed 636 new
New Year, New Hires: The California Consumer Privacy Act and Your Employees
It’s January 2020. Thousands of businesses just completed the mad dash to meet the California Consumer Privacy Act’s (CCPA) requirements. Unfortunately, now is not the time to take a breather if you have employees in California or plan to hire any in the next two years.
CCPA and How it Applies
As a refresher, the
Teach Your Children Well: DOL Issues Opinion Letter that Attending Child’s IEP School Meeting Is Covered by FMLA
If an employee asks for time off to attend a meeting at his or her child’s school, is that covered by FMLA? Maybe not but it depends on the nature of the meeting. If the child is disabled and the school meeting is for the child’s IEP, according to a recent opinion letter from the
Changing Marijuana Laws and Effective Drug Testing Policy
Although marijuana is classified as an illegal drug under federal law, a majority of states have now legalized its use in one form or another. This rapidly evolving legal landscape presents new challenges for employers, particularly those with offices and employees in several states. Employers must balance complying with often divergent federal and state laws,
Weeding Out a Job Candidate, Literally: Connecticut Court Weighs in on Medical Marijuana Laws and Drug Tests
What do you do with employees who use “legal” marijuana in violation of your Drug-Free Workplace Policy? So far, 30 states and the District of Columbia have enacted laws permitting use of marijuana for medical purposes, and eight states and the District of Columbia have legalized recreational use. Several other states are currently considering similar
Point for the (Work from) Home Team? Sixth Circuit Says Attendance at Work Not Automatically an Essential Work Function
“You have to show up for work—it’s a part of your job.” Attendance at the workplace is an essential work function in an ADA case. But is it really anymore? With technology, some would argue that many jobs can be done from anywhere, and employees (particularly disabled employees) are more and more seeking to work
Ahead of Schedule? What Oregon’s Fair Work Week Bill Means to the Retail, Hospitality, and Food Service Industries
In case you didn’t know, Oregon enacted the “Fair Work Week” law, making it the first state to legally restrict the scheduling practices of employers in the service sector. The highlights include:
- an obligatory rest period for employees between shifts,
- written work schedules in advance of shifts, and
- additional pay for employees if
The NLRB/EEOC Landmine – When Does Offensive Speech Amount to Protected Activity?
Employers need to be on the lookout for instances of offensive employee speech, which may put them between a rock and a hard place as they navigate potential claims under either anti-discrimination laws or federal labor laws.
You have probably heard that Google terminated an employee earlier this month for saying (among other things) that
Spouse Swapping Not Cool for Police Officers, Says the Fifth Circuit
Just how much can you regulate a public employee’s off-duty conduct? In an interesting and rather frank opinion, the Fifth Circuit found a sheriff’s department could regulate deputies’ private conduct pretty broadly. In Brandon Coker and Michael Golden v. Julian Whittington and Charles Owens, two Louisiana sheriff’s deputies (Coker and Golden) were terminated
“Do You Kiss Your Mother With That Post?” Second Circuit Rules on Foul Facebook Post about Employer
The Second Circuit Court of Appeals stepped in to support the NLRB’s finding that an employee’s profanity-ridden social media posting about his employer (and his employer’s mother) was not so offensive that it went beyond the protections of the NLRA for union-related activity. This decision again shows the wide latitude given to employees to engage