Compliance Stuff

Prior to the enactment of Georgia’s Restrictive Covenant Act (“GRCA”), Georgia courts uniformly struck down non-compete provisions that used “in any capacity language”, i.e., a non-compete that prohibited an employee from working for a competitor in any capacity and not limited to the services that the employee performed for his former employer . Recently, in  All States AG Parts, LLC v. Herzig  (February 2025), the Georgia Court of Appeals followed the pre-GRCA rationale and struck down what it deemed to be an overbroad non-compete. In All States, the employer All States AG Parts (“ASAP”) provided replacement parts for agricultural and construction equipment. ASAP employed Mr. Rose in Outside Sales. Mr. Rose resigned his employment with ASAP and began working for a direct competitor . When ASAP sued Mr. Rose, he argued that the non-competition provision in his employment agreement was overbroad. The trial court agreed, and the Court of Appeals upheld the trial court’s determi...

It kinda makes sense when you think about it. "YEAH, I CAN SEE THAT." Interesting decision  this week from a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the  Second Circuit . A high school math teacher (we’ll call her “Ms.  Plantagenet ”) had post-traumatic stress disorder. Years earlier, her doctor wrote a note saying she needed two 15-minute breaks per day (one in the morning, and one in the afternoon) during periods when she wasn’t responsible for teaching or dealing with the kids. The breaks, according to her doctor, would help her keep under control what sounds like very severe stress. (According to the court’s decision, Ms. Plantagenet had to be admitted for psychiatric care three times, had a stress-induced stutter, and had nightmares so bad that they caused her to throw up.) But apparently she was a good teacher and was able to make it through the work day even when she didn’t get the 15-minute breaks. When she first brought in the doctor’s note, the school...

  California employers could soon face increased penalties for workplace safety violations that are “enterprise-wide” or “egregious.” On March 25, 2025, the California Department of Industrial Relations will hold an advisory committee meeting to solicit input on proposed amendments to Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) regulations regarding so-called “enterprise-wide” and “egregious” violations. The proposed regulatory amendments follow the signing of Senate Bill 606 (SB 606), which amended Labor Code sections 6317 and 6317.8 in 2021. The definitions of “enterprise-wide” and “egregious” violations will be added to Cal/OSHA’s existing regulatory framework for citation classification and penalty calculation. Because Labor Code sections 6317 and 6317.8 are similar to federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Fed OSHA) policies, the proposed amendments are also intended to ensure Cal/OSHA’s enforcement program is at least as effective as Fed OSHA’s progr...

Working from home has become the new norm for many workers. Even before COVID-19 forced businesses to send their employees home, there were around 4 million Americans who worked remotely for at least half of the week. In addition, many companies now see remote or hybrid work as a benefit to attracting and retaining workplace talent. This article covers: Payroll requirements Foreign qualification Permits for your remote employees Tax nexus considerations Classification of remote workers Privacy and data security Workers compensation Unemployment insurance Hybrid employees Properly document working arrangements But there may be additional compliance requirements when an employee works outside a business’ home state. With remote workers, there may be tax implications, new registration requirements, and more. Unfortunately, such considerations are sometimes a surprise to employers who don’t have an HR department or lack an understanding of the implications of having remote employees. Here...

In our March 24 2025, blog  post  we discussed the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC) recent  guidance  regarding what constitutes unlawful “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI) policies. Among other things, the guidance specifies that employees may claim a “hostile work environment’ (a form of unlawful “harassment”) by showing that an employer’s DEI training was discriminatory in content, application, or context. Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), harassment based on race, sex, or another protected characteristic is unlawful where (1) enduring the offensive conduct becomes a condition of continued employment, or (2) the conduct is sufficiently  severe  or  pervasive  to create a work environment that a reasonable person would consider  intimidating, hostile, or abusive . According to the  EEOC , “Petty slights, annoyances, and isolated incidents (unless extremely serious) will not rise...

SHRM testified before the House Subcommittee on Workforce Protections on March 25 to call for modernization of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (FLSA) .  To reach the U.S. workforce’s full potential, SHRM believes in turning three essential keys — modernizing the FLSA, closing the workforce participation gap, and shaping the future of work — all of which will open doors that lead to innovation, economic growth, and a more dynamic, competitive workforce, testified Paige Boughan, M.S., SHRM-SCP, a senior vice president and director of human resources . She testified in her capacity as legislative director for the Maryland SHRM State Council. Clarity, consistency, and compliance are needed, Boughan noted in her oral testimony, including clarity of the definition of who is an employee versus an independent contractor and who is qualified for overtime. “The world has undergone significant changes since the FLSA was first passed and since Congress last made significant chan...