Contact Us
Subscribe to this blog via RSS
Join us on LinkedInCategories
- Employee Agreement
- remote work
- Federal Trade Commission
- LGBTQ
- Minors
- United States Department of Justice ("DOJ")
- work from home
- Arbitration
- Workplace health
- Trade Secrets
- Corporate
- Center for Disease Control
- Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA")
- FFCRA
- Opioid Epidemic
- Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”)
- COVID-19
- Families First Coronavirus Response Act
- H.R.6201
- Health Care Law
- IRS
- Paid Sick Leave
- Temporary Leave
- Treasury
- Coronavirus
- Worker Misclassification
- Labor Law
- Overtime
- Kentucky Unemployment Insurance Commission
- Sexual Harassment
- FMLA Retaliation
- overtime rule
- Employer Wellness Programs
- Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act ("GINA")
- Kentucky minimum wage
- Minimum wage
- Wage and Hour
- Employee Benefits
- Employment Discrimination Laws
- Employment Non-Discrimination Act ("ENDA")
- ERISA
- Human Resource Department
- Independent Contractors
- OSHA
- Overtime Pay
- Paid Time Off ("PTO")
- Sick Employees
- Employee Handbook
- Employee Misconduct
- Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)
- Kentucky Civil Rights Act (“KCRA”)
- National Labor Relations Act (NLRA)
- National Labor Relations Board (NLRB)
- Pregnancy Discrimination Act
- Social Media
- Social Media Policies
- U.S. Department of Labor
- Union
- Young v. UPS
- ADA Amendments Act of 2008 (“ADAAA”)
- Adverse Employment Action
- Americans with Disabilities Act
- Bring Your Own Device
- BYOD
- Civil Rights
- Compliance
- copyright
- Department of Labor ("DOL")
- EEOC
- Employment Law
- Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”)
- Intellectual Property
- Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act
- U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”)
- Uncategorized
- Volunteer
- Work for Hire
- Amazon
- Department of Health and Human Services
- Federal contractors
- Portal-to-Portal Act of 1947
- Security Checks
- Security Screening
- U.S. Supreme Court
- Creech v. Brown
- Kentucky Labor Cabinet’s Occupational Safety and Health Program (KOSH)
- Lane v. Franks
- Micro-unit
- Specialty Healthcare & Rehabilitation Center of Mobile
- Cloud
- EEOC v. Hill Country Farms
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Kaplan Higher Education Corp.
- Mine Safety and Health Administration ("MSHA")
- Non-exempt employees
- Northwestern
- Shazor v. Prof’l Transit Mgmt.
- Web Content Accessibility Guidelines
- Whistleblower
- "Ban-the-box"
- 2013)
- Bullying
- Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission
- Compensatory time off
- Conestoga Woods Specialties v. Sebelius
- Consumer Credit Protection Act (“CCPA”)
- Crystalline Silica
- Davis-Bacon and Related Acts
- Drug-Free Workplaces
- Earnings
- Ehling v. Monmouth-Ocean Hospital Service Corp.
- Federal Stored Communications Act (“SCA”)
- Illness and Injury Reports
- Job applications
- Jury duty
- Kentucky Department of Workers’ Claims
- Kentucky Wage and Hour Act
- McNamara O’Hara Service Contract Act
- NFL Bullying Scandal
- Payroll
- Permissible Exposure Level ("PEL")
- Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores
- Senate Bill 157
- Violence
- Wage garnishment
- WorkSmart Kentucky
- At-will employment
- Berrier v. Bizer
- Chapter 11 Bankruptcy
- Chenzira v. Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center
- COBRA
- Companionship services
- Defense of Marriage Act (“DOMA”)
- EEOC v. Fabricut
- EEOC v. The Founders Pavilion
- Employee of the Month Programs
- Endorsements
- Giant Food LLC
- Government employees
- Government shutdown
- Health-Contingent Wellness Programs
- HIPAA
- Home Health Care Workers
- KYSHRM 2013
- Madry v. Gibraltar National Corporation
- Mandatory vaccination policies
- Maternity Leave
- Medical Exams
- Megivern v. Glacier Hills Incorporated
- Motivating Factor
- Obesity
- Online Defamation
- Participatory Wellness Programs
- Pennington v. Wagner’s Pharmacy
- Pension Plans
- Private employers
- Reference checks
- SHRM
- Small Business Administration (SBA)
- Supervisor
- Tangible employment actions
- Title VII retaliation cases
- United States v. Windsor
- University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar
- Vance v. Ball State University
- Contraceptive Mandate
- Defamation
- Employee Arrests
- Employee Forms
- Employee Hazards
- Employee photographs
- Employee Training
- Employer Group Health Plans
- Employer Mandate
- Employment Practices Liability Insurance
- Federal Workplace Agencies
- FICA
- Form I-9
- Freedom of Speech
- Gatto v. United Airlines and allied Aviation Services
- House Labor and Industry Committee
- KRS 391.170
- Litigation
- Online Account Protection
- Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
- Play or Pay
- posting requirements
- Record Retention
- Religious Employer
- Right to Work Bill
- Sequester
- severance pay
- Social Media Ownership
- Supplemental Unemployment Compensation Benefits
- tax refund
- Telecommuting
- Troyer v. T.John.E Productions
- U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
- Unfair Labor Practice
- United States v. Quality Stores
- White v. Baptist Memorial Health Care Corp.
- Crisis Management
- Job Description
- Job Requirement
- Kentucky’s Whistleblower Act
- Municipal Liability
- Public Sector Liability
- social privacy laws
- Strategic Enforcement Plan (SEP)
- Wilson v. City of Central City
- Workplace Politics
- Criminal Background Checks
- Federal Department of Labor
- Kentucky Labor Cabinet
- Labor and Pensions ("HELP")
- PhoneDog v. Kravitz
- Salary Threshold
- Social Networking Online Protection Act (SNOP)
- Business Insurance
- Class Action Waivers
- Communications Decency Act
- Employee Contracts
- Employee Performance Reviews
- Employee Personnel Files
- Federal Arbitration Act (FAA)
- Hiring and Firing
- Hosanna-Tabor Opinion
- Informal Discussion Letter (“EEOC Letter”)
- Insurance Coverage
- Internet & Media Law
- Internet Defamation
- National Labor Relations Act
- Non-Compete Agreement
- Retaliation by Association
- Unemployment Benefits
- Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act
- USERRA
- Workplace Discrimination, Harassment and Retaliation
Showing 27 posts in Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).
A Day in the Life Working from Home – What Time is Compensable?
Nearly three years after it suddenly became a necessity for many employees to work from home, it’s clear that teleworking isn’t going anywhere. Many employers have chosen to allow for remote or hybrid work arrangements—but in the “work from home” era, issues like timekeeping for non-exempt employees can get a little fuzzy. We’ll walk you through a teleworking employee’s day and give you the rundown on what is compensable time under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), what isn’t, and tips for making sense of it all. More >
Ninth Circuit Ruling Portends Changes for Compensable Time
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the time employees spend booting up computers and launching their timekeeping system is compensable time under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) when these activities are integral and indispensable to an employee’s principal work activities. More >
DOL Quietly Moves to ‘All Liquidated Damages, All the Time’ Footing
The Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) has always provided for liquidated damages for violations, but in the past, the Wage and Hour Division (“WHD”) generally pursued the liquidated damages only when forced to litigate. Liquidated damages are effectively punitive in nature and amount to the full amount of back wages, doubling the hit to employers who find themselves in such a predicament. In recent years, however, the WHD has steadily increased the frequency with which it assesses these damages, which proves to be double the burden on employers. More >
New Overtime Rules May Be Here Sooner than Expected
The timeline for adoption of the Final Rule of proposed changes to the white collar overtime exemption has been hard to pin down. In early November of 2015, Solicitor of Labor M. Patricia Smith, during a panel discussion at the American Bar Association’s Labor and Employment Law Conference in Philadelphia, mentioned that the proposed changes would not be issued until late 2016, leading many to believe that they would not take effect until 2017. Later that month, the Department of Labor (“DOL”) Wage and Hour Division estimated that the rule would be published in July 2016, not quite as late as earlier implied. Then, Labor Secretary Thomas Perez stated in December in an interview with Bloomberg BNA that it seemed likely to him that the new rule would be out by spring of 2016. In February of 2016, Smith reiterated the Wage and Hour Division’s projected timeline of a July 2016 publication with an effective date 60 days later. On March 14th, 2016, the Department of Labor made the surprising move of sending its overtime rule to the White House Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”), which means that all bets are off and the rule may here sooner than predicted. More >
Employers, Don’t Sleep on Your Rights
There are ways of gaining a tactical advantage in Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) litigation, but sleeping on one’s rights in such a circumstance is not one of them. NPC International, Inc., a Pizza Hut franchisee, learned this the hard way in the Sixth Circuit in August. If the case of Skylar Gunn v. NPC International proves anything, it proves that courts will frown upon employers gaming the legal system to the detriment of employees bringing claims. More >
Surprise! That Independent Contractor is an Employee!
The Department of Labor (“DOL”) has given employers some bitter pills to swallow lately, especially in light of the proposed rule concerning new restrictions on the white collar overtime exemption. With a new set of guidance on the classification of independent contractors, the streak of DOL heartburn for employers continues unabated. More >
ALERT - Department of Labor Set to Change Overtime Exemption Regulations under the FLSA
On July 6th, the Department of Labor (“DOL”) issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking with the potential to affect an untold number of employers. The proposed rule, published in the Federal Register at 80 FR 38515, drastically changes the DOL’s interpretation of the Fair Labor Standards Act with respect to overtime exemptions. The current rule, put in place in 2004, exempts employees with salaries of at least $455 a week ($23,660 a year) and who perform executive, administrative, professional, outside sales and computer duties from overtime regulations. More >
Complaining to the Boss? The Second Circuit Says That's Protected
In 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Kasten v. Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics Corporation that oral complaints are protected by anti-relation provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), but it did not address a vital question: must those complaints be “filed” with a government agency to receive protection against retaliation, or will simple oral complaints to an employer trigger such provisions?[1] The Second Circuit recently moved to fill that gap, ruling in Greathouse v. JHS Security, Inc. that merely “filing” an oral complaint with an employer is enough to trigger anti-retaliation provisions of the FLSA[2]. More >
The Big and Small Implications in Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association
There are two important takeaways from Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association,[1] one with a broad scope and the other much narrower. The broader ruling exempts agency interpretations of laws and regulations from any notice and comment requirements under the Administrative Procedures Act (“APA”), allowing agencies to substantially alter interpretations without notice. On a different note, however, is the finding that Department of Labor (“DoL”) Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) classification interpretations are subject to change at any moment. More >
When is a Lunch Break Not a Lunch Break? The Sixth Circuit and Ruffin v. MotorCity Casino
Hopefully you aren’t reading this on your lunch break, hoping that you can then count the time spent as compensable work time, especially if you’re in the Sixth Circuit. In the case of Ruffin v. MotorCity Casino, the Sixth Circuit held that casino security guards tasked with monitoring their radios over their lunch break were not engaged in compensable work for purposes of the Fair Labor Standards Act. This may be less than good news for employees, but it might provide some leeway in the future as to what employers may permissibly ask employees for on their lunch breaks. More >
