Compliance Stuff

As return-to-office mandates rise, so, too, do employee requests for telework accommodations under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). On February 11, 2026, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) released  guidance  titled “Frequently Asked Questions from the Federal Sector about Telework Accommodations for Disabilities” (FAQs), which address federal government agencies’ rights and obligations regarding providing, modifying, and denying telework as a reasonable accommodation for federal employees with disabilities under the federal Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Although the EEOC issued the guidance in the federal-sector context in the wake of President Donald Trump’s  directive  that federal agencies return employees to full-time, in-person work, the FAQs reflect principles that apply equally to private employers under the ADA. 00:00 10:45 Quick Hits The EEOC issued FAQs to assist federal agencies in implementing President Trump’s return-to-of...

A Pennsylvania federal court dealt a blow to staffing firms that classify recruiters as exempt from overtime, ruling that a staffing firm must provide their IT recruiters overtime pay because they perform “routine sales production work” rather than administrative duties. The February 11 decision in  Thomas v. TEKsystems, Inc.  marks the second federal court in recent years to reject the administrative exemption for recruiters at the same company, and raises serious questions about whether staffing firms across the industry have been misclassifying their own workers for years . Here’s what staffing companies need to know about this decision and four steps to help your wage and hour compliance efforts. The Decision: Recruiters Are Producers, Not Administrators In  Thomas v. TEKsystems , seven former recruiters sued their employer, alleging the IT staffing firm misclassified them as exempt from the Fair Labor Standards Act’s overtime requirements . US District Judge William...

Efforts on Capitol Hill to rein in artificial intelligence technology would be like taking a wiffle ball bat to a tidal wave. That’s the message Dave Walton, partner at Fisher Phillips and Co-Chair of the firm’s AI, Data, and Analytics team, delivered to the US House Committee on Education and the Workforce earlier this month. During a hearing on “Building An AI-Ready America: Adopting AI At Work,” Walton emphasized that AI is likely to create more jobs than it displaces – and employers need to take measures to govern themselves now as the legal landscape around the tools evolve. As federal lawmakers consider legislation to place guardrails around AI use, Walton cautioned them not to go too far, particularly since established employment and labor laws already apply. AI can actually help retain employees, monitor workplace safety and health, and reduce turnover, he said. Here are four main takeaways from Walton’s testimony on AI regulation to help your business stay ahead of the game ...

The healthcare ecosystem has closed the book on a volatile 2025, and HIPAA enforcement has moved into 2026 with sharper edges, wider apertures, and higher stakes. Regulators spent 2025 refining the tools they use, broadening the set of entities they scrutinize, and tightening expectations around cybersecurity hygiene, vendor oversight, and the responsible use of digital technologies. At the same time, parallel enforcement—from the Department of Justice, the Federal Trade Commission, and state attorneys general—has reinforced the reality that data protection failures are not just a compliance problem; they are an enterprise risk with civil, criminal, and reputational dimensions. What 2025 Signaled—And Why It Matters In 2025, the Office for Civil Rights maintained its steady cadence on HIPAA Right of Access cases, but increasingly linked access failures to broader issues—training, audit controls, and vendor performance—resulting in corrective action plans that are deeper, more prescripti...

WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW IN A MINUTE OR LESS Artificial intelligence tools are rapidly reshaping how ESI is created and stored, particularly with respect to content generated by large language models. As companies adopt generative AI (GenAI) tools for drafting, summarizing, analyzing, and other business uses, courts are grappling with whether GenAI Data such as prompts (what a user types),outputs (what the AI tool generates), and activity logs (data about when and how tools were used) fall within traditional discovery obligations. The details are evolving, but recent court decisions make two things clear: Relevant GenAI Data is discoverable; and Parties must treat it like any other potentially relevant ESI Traditional Discovery Rules Still Govern Non-Traditional Data Under FRCP 26(b)(1), parties may obtain discovery of non-privileged material that is relevant and proportional to the needs of the case. Courts have made clear that new forms of ESI are not exempt simply because they are nove...