News and Articles

STATE OF NEW YORK PASSES LEGISLATION IMPOSING FINES FOR THE ADVERTISEMENT OF ILLEGAL APARTMENT RENTALS

Erin Lloyd - Friday, December 16, 2016

Recently, the New York state legislature passed a law that imposes significant fines on those who advertise the renting of apartments in ways that violate certain New York City and state laws. Specifically, any print, television, radio, mail, text, or online advertisement, such as one through Airbnb, which solicits an illegal rental of an entire residential apartment, is punishable by up to $1,000 for a first offence, as much as $5,000 for a second offense, and $7,500 for a third and subsequent violations.

Almost immediately, and as previously promised, Airbnb filed a lawsuit to contest the law, which included asking the Southern District of New York to grant a temporary injunction blocking the enforcement of the new law. Both state Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and attorneys for the city agreed not to enforce the law until the request for a preliminary injunction was resolved, but as of the end of November, Airbnb agreed to withdraw its lawsuit against New York State entirely. The company appears poised to continue its battle with New York City, challenging its legal jurisdiction to impose the fines. This battle is sure to come with many more twists and turns in the coming months and we will surely revisit it.

For years now lawmakers and proponents of home sharing, like Airbnb, have been at odds over the legality and regulation of short-term rentals. The combination of rising rents and costs of living, along with the increased convenience of home sharing online through Airbnb has led to a spike in short-term rentals statewide as a means of generating much-needed supplemental income. As the number of short-term rentals has grown exponentially, lawmakers and officials have been scrambling to figure out how to best address the home sharing economy.

On the one hand, many residents feel that they should be allowed to generate extra income through home sharing. Often, monies paid by transient guests is absolutely necessary for tenants to pay their monthly rents. By participating in the home sharing economy, people are able to stay in their homes and make ends meet. Home sharing proponents say that their actions are beneficial overall and claim that the real motivation behind “anti-Airbnb” legislation is to protect the hotel industry, which has been declining with the rise of the share economy.

On the other hand, the government does have an interest in insuring that rentals are safe and properly equipped to handle numerous transient guests. A rotating set of strangers in a residential building can cause a plethora of safety issues and skirts the various tax and other requirements imposed on commercial spaces, such as hotels. When individuals or landlords rent out apartments on a short-term basis with such a frequency that they are essentially operating illegal hotels, this becomes contrary to the residential purpose of the buildings and is more akin to a commercial operation.

Also at issue is the effect that Airbnb and other short-term rental platforms are having on affordable housing as a whole. A 2014 report by the Attorney General’s office revealed that almost three-fourths of local Airbnb advertisements between 2010 and 2014 were illegal hotels that violated state and city laws. What’s more concerning is that even though a small percentage of Airbnb hosts have multiple listings, these hosts account for more than one-third of Airbnb’s business in New York. In effect, this means that at least one-third of all New York listings on Airbnb are being managed not by people renting out part or all of their own homes, but by those who are acting as de facto illegal hotel operators.

Politicians and some tenants’ rights groups argue that this study supports their claims that Airbnb is worsening New York City’s housing crisis by making affordable housing unavailable to its residents. Their argument is that apartments that are occupied entirely or mostly by transient guests by definition reduce the number of apartments available for full-time residents. A reduced housing stock skews the level of demand, which is already out of control, which in turn causes rents to go up. Also, because the amounts transient guests pay per week or per day add up to significantly more than what monthly tenants typically pay, there is a disincentive to lease apartments to permanent residents. The overall effect is skyrocketing rents and fewer affordable apartments for rent for residents.

What makes the most current legislation different is that for the first time, lawmakers are going after the advertisement of an illegal rental as a stand-alone offence – whether or not the apartment is ultimately rented in a manner that violates the law.

We will be following any developments in this case carefully, so check back for updates. Our office can help individuals navigate the laws and regulations specific to your situation. For questions about Airbnb, contact Kyle Carraro (kc@lloydpatel.com) or Erin Lloyd (el@lloydpatel.com).

 

NOBEL PRIZE WINNERS OFFER CRITICAL INSIGHT INTO DRAFTING EMPLOYMENT CONTRACTS

Yogi Patel - Friday, December 16, 2016

The groundbreaking work of Oliver Hart of Harvard University and Bengt Holmstrom of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, which includes providing invaluable insight into how employment contracts should be structured, recently earned the two professors the 2016 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Science. Hart and Holmstrom’s research offers a variety of theoretical models and frameworks through which they analyze the competing interests of employees, managers, CEOs, shareholders, and others, and attempt to reconcile them via contracts.

Over the past few decades, Homstrom and Hart’s findings have been used to evaluate whether particular contracts accurately measure the performance and value of employees and other agents to companies while offering the right amount of incentive. Specific factors that the research contemplates in its assessment of employment contracts include ownership, control, the measurability of an agent’s performance, risk sharing, and the motivations of the parties involved.

Rather than simply pay an individual a fixed salary or reward a manager for the performance of a company in a vacuum, the professors suggest considering alternative compensation structures and contracting terms, including:

Deferred Compensation

In order to ensure that a company’s interests are aligned with those of an employee, it may make sense to tie an individual’s compensation to performance rather than pay her a set amount. By withholding a portion of an employee’s compensation, the company can provide incentives for the individual to earn the full amount by meeting certain goals. Whether or not this type of arrangement makes sense will depend in great part on the measurability of an employee’s performance and the stability of the business environment.

Performance Evaluation based on the Overall Market

Another metric for evaluating an employee’s value, particularly one who is in a decision-making position, is the overall performance of the company. One common mistake businesses make is setting goals or targets based solely on the absolute performance of the company, rather than taking into account the performance of the company as compared to other similarly situated businesses. If a company does well in a thriving market or suffers during a market collapse, the employee should not be rewarded for good luck or punished for misfortune. A company performing well relative to others is a far superior measurement of employee value.

Designation of a Main Decision-Maker

Most contracts cannot contemplate the exact outcome of every situation that may arise in a given relationship. Companies recognize that it is impossible to list specific instructions for every job responsibility, and this in turn may actually be counterproductive. In such cases, the parties should determine who has the power to decide what to do in situations where they cannot reach an agreement. In this manner, the parties are able to avoid having to anticipate every possible future event while entering into a relationship that allows them to move forward with their main, general purpose, i.e. employment.

While Hart and Holmstrom’s work is highly theoretical and informative, it is essential to use their tools in conjunction with a business’s specific needs. Depending on the business type, number of employees, and variety of other factors, businesses may have widely different terms and compensation structures that work best for them. Notwithstanding this, business owners are advised to consider the research finds of Professor Hart and Holstrom’s when making decisions about their own employees and businesses.

This article was prepared with the assistance of Julie Lee, 3L (CUNY School of Law).

 

Legal Update - November 2016 Newsletter

Yogi Patel - Friday, December 16, 2016

Dear valued clients and supporters: This month's newsletter will focus on significant and immediate changes to state and federal employment laws.

 

Update to Federal Law

Under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), significant changes to the Act were poised to go into effect in a matter of days (Dec 1, 2016). We covered these changes in detail in a previous article, but in short, unless an employee meets certain job performance requirements (the duties test) and earns at least $47,476.00 per year, that employee was going to be entitled to overtime pay for each week they worked in excess of 40 hours. The existing law sets that monetary threshold at $23,600 per year.

However, a federal court in Texas issued a nation-wide injunction yesterday that now temporarily prevents these changes from going into effect on December 1, 2016. Thus, for the time being, the threshold remains at $23,600. Notwithstanding this, employers are still advised to consider whether they are complying with the "duties" test under FLSA - irrespective of the uncertainty regarding the salary level. The "duties" test functionally looks at the day-to-day responsibilities given to an employee. As a general principal under FLSA, an employee who meets the salary level and the salary basis tests is exempt only if s/he also performs exempt job duties. Whether the duties of a particular job qualify as exempt depends on what they truly are - job titles or position descriptions are of limited usefulness in this determination. It is the actual job tasks that must be evaluated, along with how that particular job task "fits" into the employer's overall operations.

 

Update to State Law

As of December 31, 2016 the minimum wage in New York State is set to change. The changes vary depending on the industry, number of employees and location. For example, the minimum wage is different if you are in the fast food industry. It is different if you employee more than 11 people and different again depending on whether your business is located in NYC vs. Nassau/Suffolk County vs. Upstate NY - as in all three have different rates with different effective dates. We covered these changes in detail in a previous newsletter.

Employers should likewise be aware that the Wage Theft Prevention Act (WTPA) requires them to give employees written notification of these pay changes at least seven (7) days in advance of the effective date. Alternatively, an employer may issue a new paystub that contains the notice of wage increase. The written notice must be in English and also in the employee’s primary language if it is not English. Employers must obtain a signed and dated written acknowledgement of the pay change from the employee following the same language guidelines. Employers who violate these requirements may be subject to civil penalties of up to $50 per day, per employee.

Readers are encouraged to follow us on Twitter (@lloydpatelllp) and Facebook to receive updates on these and other issues throughout the month.

 

Legal Update - October 2016 Newsletter

Yogi Patel - Tuesday, October 18, 2016

Dear valued clients and supporters: This month's newsletter will focus on: (1) trademarking website domain names; (2) impact on a business in the event of a divorce; and (3) rethinking employment contracts in light of the recent award of the Nobel Prize in Economic Science.

Trademarks and Website Domain Names
Contrary to the assumption of many, simply registering the name of a business as a domain name does not give the same protections as trademarking the name itself. Domain name registrants lease, rather than own their website domain names, whereas a trademark grants exclusive use of a particular domain name in commerce nationwide. Thus, businesses who fail to trademark their domain names are much more susceptible to infringement and customer confusion due to another entity using the same or similar name. And many businesses that spend countless resources on their brand (often tied to their websites) could find themselves in a position where they lose their ability to use that domain name resulting from their failure to seek federal trademark protection. For further details on the differences between registering a domain name and a trademark and why businesses should strongly consider the latter, an in-depth article can be found here on our website.

Protecting a Business from Divorce (Updated)
In our newsletter last month, we briefly discussed the need for business owners to prepare themselves in the event of a divorce. A more in-depth article on what steps owners should take to protect their businesses from a divorce is now posted here on our website.

Rethinking Employment Contracts

The most recent Nobel Prize in Economic Science was awarded to two professors for their work on improving the design of employment contracts. At the core of Dr. Oliver Hart and Dr. Bengt Homstrom's study were findings that suggested new ways in which businesses should value their employees' contributions and provide incentives to maximize performance. By restructuring its contracts based upon the professors' research, business can more accurately measure and incentivize their employees' performance and provide compensation accordingly. A more in-depth article on this topic will be posted next month here on our website.

Readers are encouraged to follow us on Twitter (@lloydpatelllp) and Facebook to receive updates on these and other issues throughout the month.

Protecting Your Business in a Divorce

Yogi Patel - Tuesday, October 11, 2016

Approximately 50% of marriages do not end in a “happily ever after” and while the relationship is still civil, you should take steps to protect your business and prepare your finances in the case that your relationship ends in a divorce.

Equitable distribution is the process by which the court divides martial assets between spouses who are soon to be divorced. Generally, when you open a business before your marriage, the increase in value of your business during your marriage is considered marital asset and is subject to equitable distribution. If you opened a business during your marriage, the business is typically marital asset and subject to equitable distribution.

The key issues that arise are the valuation of the business and how much of the business your spouse is entitled to receive. The amount your spouse will receive is dependent on your circumstances. Even if your spouse had nothing to do with your business, the court will take into consideration numerous factors including how many children you have and who takes care of them. Your spouse may be the one who takes the children to school and attend all the student-teacher conferences so you could work extra hours at the office. The court will also consider who takes care of the home, does the grocery shopping, and ensures the bills are paid. Sometimes, marital responsibilities are distributed so that one partner could dedicate all their time to the business while the other takes care of essential home needs. Often times while a spouse runs the business and makes the big decisions, the other spouse supports the business through administrative work or financial contributions.

If your business existed before your marriage, the best course of action is to plan ahead with a prenuptial agreement. A prenuptial agreement is a contract between two people who are about to be married that addresses how assets owned and earned by each person will be distributed in the event of a divorce, whether alimony (maintenance support) will be required in the event of a divorce and how to calculate it, and how assets will be disposed of in the case of death.

If you’re already married, you can enter into a postnuptial agreement. This is a contract that addresses the same rights as the prenuptial agreement. However courts tend to view postnups less favorably. If a business was started during the marriage, the spouse that was not involved is less likely to want to exclude the business from equitable distribution.

You also have the option to place the business in a trust. Meaning you no longer personally own it, but the trust owns it. Generally, this will protect the value of the company and keep the business from being counted as a marital asset.

Dividing assets during a divorce becomes more complicated when there are numerous business partners involved or you are a shareholder of a corporation. Because a business is legally its own separate entity, the question is whether a court could compel your partners to hand over private business information for the purpose of valuation.

Several interests are at play such as the rights of the business entity, the rights of your business partners, and the rights of your spouse. It is a balancing act that will require legal strategies chosen by your attorney. To protect the interest of the business as a whole and the partners, the partnership or shareholder agreement should include a provision that would protect everyone’s rights in the event of a partner’s divorce. Specifically, the provision would appear in a buy-sell agreement between the partners and would address how each partners’ share of the company should be valued, and a requirement that partners either enter into a prenup before marriage or a postnup if already married and also include a waiver or limitation of the spouse’s interest in the business through a stock restriction agreement executed by the spouse.

It is essential to divorce-proof your business, whether you are about to get married or are already married. Because the valuation and distribution of a business depends on your personal situation, it is important to consult with an experienced attorney to ensure your business rights are protected.

This article was prepared with the assistance of Julie Lee, (J.D. Candidate, 2017, CUNY School of Law).

 

Trademark and Website Domain Names

Yogi Patel - Monday, October 10, 2016

Coming to America (1988)

Cleo McDowell:

“Look... me and the McDonald's people got this little misunderstanding. See, they're McDonald's... I'm McDowell's. They got the Golden Arches, mine is the Golden Arcs. They got the Big Mac, I got the Big Mick. We both got two all-beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles and onions, but their buns have sesame seeds. My buns have no seeds.”

Most businesses, at some point or the other, hope to establish a unique brand with the aim of distinguishing themselves from others within their respective industries. Businesses spend countless resources to establish a brand and once they do, they should protect it at all costs. While only a parody, the scene from Coming to America quoted above illustrates the issue well: What if you managed to come up with something that catches on in the market place and becomes entrenched in your ability to generate business. What would you do to protect it? McDonald’s would likely go after McDowell’s to prevent him from creating confusion and diluting its brand.

The point of this article is to discuss how domain names, which should be thought of as your “brand” can be protected using trademark laws. There is little doubt that most businesses view online presence as essential. A website, is generally the portal through which the business makes its presence known. Whether it is marketing with the intention of providing business owners opportunities to expand their services or whether it is actually providing the service using the website itself – website are here to stay and are poised to become increasingly more essential to businesses.

To make the website more readily identifiable to their customer-base, business owners frequently use their business name as the domain name. A common assumption is that registering a domain name is enough to safeguard the name from being used by others. Simply put, signing up with a registrar and paying a small annual fee only gives the business a license to use the domain name for a certain period of time. Additionally, this right could be revoked at any time. So most domain names are not owned by the business, they are simply on lease. Imagine spending a significant amount of time and resources into building your website and driving traffic to it, only to have to start all over again because someone owns the trademark that is your domain name.

Registering or licensing a domain name will not protect business owners from others who actually trademark the same name or a similar domain name. This could lead to customer confusion, particularly where others with a similar domain name are also selling similar products. Online businesses are especially vulnerable to infringement, because the website is its sole identity. In most cases, trademarking the domain name is an important step towards protecting a business’ online identity and will provide business owners with legal recourse in the case of infringement. Trademarking a domain name essentially declares that the business owner has legal rights to that name.

A business owner who registers a trademark has an exclusive legal right to use the mark in commerce. For example, a business owner who trademarks a domain name will have the exclusive right to use that domain name in relation to its goods and services. Trademarking a domain name is subject to the same rules and standards as trademarking a business name or logo.

While choosing a domain name may be simple, not every word is protected by trademark law. A business owner who wants to trademark a domain name will have to consider a few factors. The name must identify products or services in that business, and it must be distinctive. For example, using common words such as coffee.com or juiceshop.com are most likely ineligible for trademark protection. The more unique the name is, the more likely it will qualify as a trademark. A diligent search should be performed to avoid the potential of any future legal liability as well as to ensure that an application for trademarking the domain name is not rejected.

This article was prepared with the help of Julie Lee, J.D. candidate (2017), CUNY School of Law.

 

Legal Update - September 2016 Newsletter

Yogi Patel - Monday, September 12, 2016

Dear valued clients and supporters: This month's newsletter will focus on: (1) graduate students' right to organize; (2) the Fair Pay and Safe Workplace Executive Order; and (3) how to protect a business in the event of a divorce.

Graduate Student Unions

In a recent ruling, the National Labor Relations Board determined that graduate student assistants working at private colleges and universities are "employees" as defined by the National Labor Relations Act. As "employees," graduate students will have the right to organize, form a union, and collectively bargain. This decision was an explicit reversal of an NLRB ruling from 12 years ago in which the Board found that graduate student assistants were not employees. For further details on the NLRB ruling and its potential impact, an in-depth article can be found here on our website.

Fair Pay and Safe Workplace

The final rules implementing the Fair Pay and Safe Workplace Executive Order have been issued and will go into effect starting October 25, 2016. Businesses that engage with the federal government through contracts are specifically advised to understand the requirements of the Order. The Order bars contractors and subcontractors with certain labor law violations from being eligible to receive federal contracts. A more in-depth article on the Order's requirements and implementation schedule is now posted here on our website.

Protecting a Business From Divorce

When starting a business or getting married, planning for the failure of either is often the last thing on anyone's mind. However, people inevitably change and so do many relationships, and an unprepared business owner who finds themselves in the middle of a divorce will be shocked to discover the impact it has on the company. Business owners are cautioned to carefully plan how a potential divorce, especially one involving multiple business partners, could impact the business. An in-depth article will be posted to our website next month on this issue.

Readers are encouraged to follow us on Twitter (@lloydpatelllp) and Facebook to receive updates on these and other issues throughout the month.

 

Fair Pay and Safe Workplace Executive Order to Impose Greater Scrutiny on Federal Contractors

Yogi Patel - Thursday, September 08, 2016

 

On August 25, 2016, the Department of Labor and the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council issued the final rule implementing the Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces Executive Order (the “Order”). Initially signed by President Obama in July 2014, the Order will bar contractors that violate federal and state workplace protection laws from receiving federal contracts. Under the Order, contractors and subcontractors must disclose labor law violations that occurred within the last three years, information which will then be used in considering contract awards. Once a contract is awarded, contractors and subcontractors are required to provide updated information every six months, and the contracting officer will use the new information to determine whether to continue the contract or not.

The final rule will become effective on October 25, 2016, with certain provisions gradually phasing in over the next few years. Generally speaking, under the Order, contractors and subcontractors that bid on contracts with a value of $500,000 or more will be required to disclose labor violations relating to workplace safety, discrimination, labor organizing rights, minimum wage, and overtime hours, among others. Contracting officers, with the guidance of a Labor Compliance Advisor, will assess contractor’s violations to determine whether they rise to the level of a lack of integrity or business ethics. Depending on the circumstances, violations may result in penalties, including rejection of the bid, termination of existing contracts, referral to another agency, such as the Department of Labor or the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for investigation, or referral for suspension and disbarment.

The Order also includes the Paycheck Transparency Clause, which requires contractors to provide accurate wage, hour, and other information relevant to workers’ paychecks. Contractors must also provide non-employees with written notice of their status as independent contractors. Finally, the Order prohibits contractors and subcontractors with bids exceeding $1 million from requiring workers to sign agreements to arbitrate Title VII claims or any tort related claim related to or arising out of sexual harassment or sexual assault.

Implementation will be carried out on a phased-in schedule based upon the size of a contract. As of October 25, 2016, disclosure and assessment of labor law compliance will be required for prime contractors with solicitations of $50 million or more. On April 25, 2017, the disclosure and assessment requirements will apply to contractors with a contract value of $500,000 and up. And by October 25, 2017, the requirements will also apply to subcontractors with a contract value of approximately $500,000.

The prohibition on mandatory arbitration for Title VII and sexual assault related claims will become effective October 25, 2016, however, the paycheck transparency requirements won’t be implemented until January 1, 2017.

The three-year look-back period for labor violations will also be implemented on a phased-in basis. Until October 25, 2017, contractors and subcontractors will only need to report labor violations that occurred within the preceding year. On October 25, 2017, the look-back period increases to two years, and then three years starting October 25, 2018.

Prior to offering a bid for a federal contract, contractors and subcontractors are advised to seek legal counsel to evaluate their current disclosure obligations and prepare for the Contracting Officer’s evaluation. Likewise, employers with federal contracts exceeding $1 million should review with an attorney any current arbitration agreements to ensure they are not in violation of the Order.

Overall, proponents of the Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces Executive Order hope that by rewarding businesses and individuals that comply with labor laws, there will be a significant improvement in workplace standards for the approximately 28 million employees and thousands of government contractors that the Order will affect.

This article is not intended to be nor should be construed as legal advice. As with any issue, business and individuals should seek the advice of counsel for their own particular needs.


 

In a Stark Reversal, the NLRB Rules Columbia University Graduate Students May Unionize

Yogi Patel - Wednesday, September 07, 2016

The National Labor Relations Board ruled late last month that student assistants working at private colleges and universities are “employees” under the National Labor Relations Act and can organize and form a union. This reverses the position of the Board, which ruled in 2004 that graduate teaching and research assistants were not employees, reasoning that the students’ relationship with the school was “primarily educational.”

In reversing its 12-year old position in the Brown University case, the NLRB wrote that it wrongly “deprived an entire category of workers the protections of the [National Labor Relations Act], without a convincing justification in either the statutory language or the policies” of the law.

The proper role of graduate students and their contributions outside the classroom has been a source of controversy and debate for nearly two decades, as both private and public institutions of higher education have grown more and more reliant on them for the institutions to operate. Many see increased use of graduate students and low-paid, temporary adjuncts as part of a movement away from full-time professors, a move that has been criticized by educators and students. Students also point out that such work is mandatory as part of many graduate programs, but the pay leaves some of them living in poverty while the time demands prevent them from obtaining other work to supplement their income without compromising their ability to fulfill academic needs.

Schools, on the other hand, argue that unionization could lead to negotiations about inherently educational factors, such as the length of classes, the content of curriculum, or the method or amount of grading.

The Columbia University ruling allows graduate and undergraduate teaching assistants, as well as graduate and departmental research assistants at Columbia University to join Graduate Workers of Columbia-GWC, UAW, but not before the case is reviewed again by an NLRB Manhattan regional director, who must still determine who is eligible to vote in the union election.

Legal Update - July 2016 Newsletter

Yogi Patel - Monday, July 11, 2016

Dear valued clients and supporters: This month's newsletter will focus on: (1) updates to federal overtime regulations; (2) the protocols and pitfalls of the I-9 verification process; and (3) common law and federal trademark protections.

Federal Overtime Regulations Updates

Federal regulations were updated recently to greatly expand the number of employees who will be eligible for overtime as of December 1, 2016. The Fair Labor Standards Act (the FLSA) is the primary federal law that regulates the payment of overtime wages to employees. The recent updates to the federal regulations greatly raises the overtime salary threshold. This change is estimated to remove some 4.2 million employees from "exemption", thereby entitling them to overtime pay. For employees and businesses who want to learn more about these changes and the impact they changes will have, an in-depth article can be found here on our website.

The I-9 Verification Process

In our last newsletter, we covered some of the pitfalls and recommended practices for businesses, in particular, employers who have to comply with the I-9 employer verification process under Federal law. A more in-depth article on this topic is now posted here on our website.

Competing Trademark Rights

Business owners and other alike often wonder whether or not they need to register their trademarks. While using unique words, symbols, or phrases in connection with the sale of goods or services provides some legal protection under the common law, this protection can be somewhat limited. For example, common law trademark rights tend to be restricted to the geographical area and manner in which the mark is used. In contrast, registering with United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) grants the owner exclusive use of the mark nationwide. Additionally, federal registration serves as constructive notice of ownership and use, and grants the holder the right to sue in federal court for trademark infringement. Still, federal trademark rights can, in certain circumstances, be restricted or even superseded by common law rights. To learn more about various types of trademark rights, infringement, and conflicts, an in-depth article will be posted next month on our website.

Readers are encouraged to follow us on Twitter (@lloydpatelllp) and Facebook to receive updates on these and other issues throughout the month.

 


Recent Posts


Tags

Credit Checks Business Law Overtime Exemptions NQSO Household Employees NYC Sexual harrassment law Newsletter Domain Name Payroll Scams Internet Law New York City Human Rights Law Credit History employment discrimination lawsuits Department of Labor Arbitration Agreements Real Estate Law Criminal Record Selling Business Westchester Safe and Sick Time Laws Paid Family Leave NYC Salary History Law Workplace Requirements Corporate Law Trademark Law Ban the Box Interview Series Fair Pay and Safe Workplace Executive Order Right to Unionize Employment Law Worker's Rights Tax-Deferred Savings Interns as Employees Nanny Audit Postnup I-9 Verification Sexual Harassment Attracting Investment Credit Illegal rentals drug testing Joint-Employer Relationship LinkedIn Freelance Isn't Free Public-Sector Union Fees Employee Salary Histories National Labor Relations Board federal Department of Labor Transgender protections Fair Labor Standards Act Trademark licensing Glatt v. Fox Searchlight Pictures Fair Workweek Law Employment Offer/Agreement NYC Human Right's Law's Browning-Ferris Case #meToo Sexual Harassment policy Business Landlord-Tenant Law Federal Overtime Law Negotiating Divorce Federal Contractors Apple vs. FBI Lactation Law Interns Human Rights Law AirBnB Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) entrepreneur Prenup commuter benefits Technology Non-Qualified Stock Options Pregnancy Start-up Ventures U.S. Department of Labor Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council Womens Rights Nobel Prize Independent Contractor Immigration Status ACA Fair Work Week Legislation Glatt v. Fox Searchlight Pictures, Inc. EEOC Filing Requirement workplace discrimination Web Domains graduate students marijuana usage Unionization Hairstyle Discrimination $15 Minimum Wage Intellectual Property Executive Negotiation New York Earned Sick Time Act Housing Law National Labor Relations Act Facebook Privacy and Litigation Trade Secrets Mandatory Class Action Waivers stocks NY payroll law Firm Announcements Trade Secrets Act New Address NLRB Affordable Care Act Minimum wage Employer Mandate sexual harassment training Employment Contracts Privacy Alter-Ego Doctrine Overtime Rules Fair Chance Act Unions Executive Severance Security Westchester County implementing new leave laws Fair Play to Pay Act Health Care Wage Theft Protection Act

Archive

EDIT - blog-container - This controls the styles for the headings

EDIT - BlogTagCloud - Font style

description

  • EDIT  - post-body - Font style

EDIT - side-panel - This is the colour of the sidebar headings

Snap | BC Module - Blog - Blog Description

Snap | BC Module - Blog - Blog Title

EDIT - Snap | BC Module - Blog - Date - This is the date box style

EDIT - Snap | BC Module - Blog - Post Content - Font style

EDIT - Snap | BC Module - Blog - Post Title - Heading style

EDIT  - Snap | BC Module - Blog - Sidebar Content - Font style

EDIT - Snap | BC Module - Blog - Sidebar Title - Heading style

latest blog title snap text

 

Disclaimer: Nothing on this website is or should be construed as legal advice.
An attorney-client relationship does not exist with our firm unless a signed
retainer agreement is executed, and we do not offer legal advice through
this site or any of the content located on it. For legal advice for your
particular circumstances, please contact us directly.