Compliance Stuff

On February 25, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit  ruled  in  Bruce v. Adams and Reese, LLP  that employers cannot compel arbitration of a case under a mandatory pre-dispute arbitration agreement when an employee or former employee sues on multiple claims and at least one of them is for sexual assault and/or sexual harassment. Under the  Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021 (EFAA) , mandatory pre-dispute arbitration agreements are invalid with respect to sexual assault or sexual harassment disputes. 0:00 6:57 Quick Hits In  Bruce v. Adams and Reese ,  LLP , a former employee sued a law firm for disability discrimination, retaliation, sexual harassment, and hostile work environment. The Sixth Circuit recently concluded that a mandatory pre-dispute arbitration agreement is voidable when a plaintiff brings multiple claims in a case that includes sexual harassment and/or sexual assault. This is ...

This month’s  Friday Five  covers recent decisions on credibility pertaining to long COVID symptoms, weighing of disability evidence, overpayment accounting, preemption of state law claims, and a motion to compel discovery on financial incentives and other information. District of Vermont grants insurer’s motion for judgment on the record in long COVID case finding the plaintiff was not credible.   Plaintiff was terminated from his engineering position because “his engagement ended with his client.”   He submitted a claim for short-term disability (“STD”) and long-term disability (“LTD”) benefits, alleging inability to work due to symptoms of long COVID that pre-dated his termination .  The District of Vermont did not reach the question of whether the  de novo  or arbitrary and capricious standard applied because it found the plaintiff’s claim did not survive even under the broader  de novo  standard, due in part to the plaintiff’s lack ...

October will bring vibrant foliage, cooler temperatures, and a heap of new workplace laws. From California to Connecticut, employers across the country will be impacted by state and local requirements taking effect next month. Some trends this fall include pay transparency, paid sick leave, and data privacy protections. Here’s your employer cheat sheet to the laws taking effect in October 2025. Note : All laws listed here will take effect on  October 1  unless otherwise noted. California Regulation of AI Use in Employment Decisions.  The California Civil Council of the Civil Rights Department adopted  regulations  earlier this year that protect against employment discrimination as a result of the use of artificial intelligence (AI), algorithms , and other automated-decision systems. For a closer look at the new rules, check out our prior FP coverage  here .  Colorado New Data Privacy Rules for Businesses.  New privacy rules will refine protections...

On August 19, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan held that an employee was not protected under the Americans with Disabilities Act since he had not been medically cleared to return to work and could not perform his essential job functions. The decision in  Haack v. Lapeer County Road Commission  highlights the stance of requests for indefinite leave in the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. Quick Hits On August 19, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan held that an employee on medical leave was not protected under the ADA since he had not been medically cleared to return to work and could not perform his essential job functions. The employer had already granted over a year of leave, so the employee’s request for more open-ended leave was considered unreasonable. The court reasoned that neutral and nondisability-based communications from the employer did not support a hostile work environment claim . Background on the C...