Compliance Stuff

As Congress continues to grapple with budget deadlines, the possibility of a government shutdown is never far from the minds of federal contractors. Unlike many federal employees, who may be furloughed with back pay authorized by Congress, government contractors often bear the brunt of shutdowns in the form of stopped work, delayed payments, or even contract terminations. With the potential for significant financial and operational impact, contractors should be proactive in both preparing for and managing the effects of a shutdown. 1. Review Your Contracts for Shutdown Implications Every federal contract is different, and the impact of a shutdown depends on the nature of the contract and its funding. Contractors should carefully review: Funding Clauses  – Determine whether your contract is fully funded or incrementally funded. Fully funded contracts may continue through a shutdown, while incrementally funded contracts could be halted once funds are exhausted. Stop-Work Clauses ...

In September and October of each year, many businesses hire seasonal workers to prepare for the upcoming holiday season, particularly in the retail and hospitality industries . Employers that are staffing up must exercise caution to avoid hiring mistakes and missteps concerning requirements related to pay transparency, privacy protections, background checks, and the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in the recruitment process and hiring. Quick Hits It may be a mistake to assume that state and federal laws governing pay transparency, privacy, background checks, and the use of AI do not apply to seasonal hires. The variation in state laws can complicate compliance efforts for multistate employers. Job Listings The requirements of  pay transparency laws  can vary significantly by state and locality, often requiring employers to disclose a wage range in all job postings, regardless of whether a position is seasonal or permanent. Currently, fourteen states and the District of C...

California employers across industries have been forced to make difficult decisions concerning staffing levels and the need for workforce reductions in recent months. Layoffs, facility closures, and employee relocations can potentially trigger an employer’s duty to give employees advance notice of a layoff or certain other workplace events. A failure to give notice may expose employers to liability – and recent legal developments make it essential for California employers to understand their obligations. What should you do to determine whether your company is covered by Cal-WARN and how can you comply? Background Notice may be required under both the federal Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (WARN Act) and the California WARN Act. Both federal WARN and Cal-WARN require employers to give at least 60 days’ advance notice to employees for qualifying facility closures and layoffs. However, the laws differ in determining who qualifies as a “covered employer” that must give ...

Pennsylvania’s Allegheny County, which includes Pittsburgh, is setting up a “Steel Curtain” of worker protections in response to federal deregulatory efforts. County officials issued an executive order just before Labor Day that aims to ramp up enforcement of local workplace laws and expand organizing rights, as well as sectoral bargaining, across the region. We’ll explain how the order impacts private employers and give you four key takeaways. Quick Overview Allegheny County Executive Sara Innamorato signed an  executive order  on August 28 that expands worker protections and aims to ensure that “prosperity is broadly shared, workplaces are safe and fair, and every worker’s dignity is respected.” To accomplish these goals, the county will establish: a first-of-its-kind  Office of Worker Protections  (OWP), which will enforce the county’s “policies, laws, and mandates regarding anti-discrimination, worker protection, workplace benefits, and workplace safety;” a ...

We are about to put an employee on a Performance Improvement Plan. Can they sue us for employment discrimination? Many employers use Performance Improvement Plans, or “PIPs,” as a way to provide clear guidance and direction to employees. Employees given a PIP still have a job, and typically don’t lose any pay. But can a PIP be the basis for an employment discrimination claim? Until recently, the answer probably was “no.” Many courts in the U.S. had denied such claims, finding that placement on a PIP did not constitute a “material,” or “substantial” harm to the employee. But in 2024, the Supreme Court decision in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis concluded that there is no requirement of materiality or substantial harm to advance a discrimination claim under Title VII - rather, only “some harm” need be shown . And for more information on the impact of that decision, refer to our Littler 2 the Point,  What is the impact of  Muldrow v. City of St. Louis  on discrimination claims ...

The Colorado Supreme Court just gave employers significant relief from minimum wage lawsuits. Last week, in  By the Rockies v. Perez , the c ourt ruled that the applicable limitations period for a Minimum Wage Act (MWA) violation is two years (or three years for willful violations) – rather than the six-year timeframe sought by the plaintiff in the case. We’ll explain what happened and how this decision impacts Colorado employers. Quick Background Colorado’s MWA gives employees who receive less than the minimum wage a right to sue and recover any unpaid amounts owed by the employer – but it is silent as to the applicable limitations period for bringing such claims. Therefore, prior to the  Perez  decision, claimants, employers, and courts were left to speculate about how long employees had to bring any minimum wage claims. The Colorado Supreme Court has now conclusively answered that question . Perez v. By the Rockies In 2022, Samuel Perez sued By the Rockies, LLC (BTR),...