News and Articles

September 2015 NEWSLETTER

Yogi Patel - Wednesday, September 09, 2015

Dear valued clients and supporters: This month's newsletter will focus on: (1) the NLRB's restatement of the joint-employer standard, expanding the right to unionize; (2) the New York City ban on employers using or requesting credit information of employees and job applicants; and (3) Businesses' need to keep trade secrets safe, methods for protecting them, and actions to take when they are misappropriated.

NLRB Expands Right to Unionize 
Under the National Labor Relations Act, employees have the right to collectively bargain (unionize) only against their employer. The joint-employer doctrine recognizes that in circumstances where two separate entities each have the right to exercise a certain degree of control over a set of employees' working conditions, that both entities should be considered employers. In a recent decision, Browning-Ferris Indus., the NLRB "restated" its standard for evaluating the existence of a joint-employer relationship in a way that expanded its scope. The decision particularly impacts the franchise industry.  (FULL ARTICLE)
 

NYC Ban on Employer use of Credit Information 
As of September 3, 2015, NYC employers will be prohibited from using or requesting the consumer credit history of an applicant or employee pursuant to Local Law 37. Under the new law, it will be considered an unlawful discriminatory practice to ask applicants or employees about their credit information, such as their credit score, missed payments, and collections. Any use of such credit information with regard to hiring, compensation, or the terms, conditions, or privileges of employment will also be considered an unlawful discriminatory practice. Employees and applicants who suffer credit discrimination will be protected by New York City Human Rights Law, which allows them to file a claim against the employer and seek compensatory and punitive damages, as well as discretionary costs and attorney's fees. Employers should be aware of this development and work with their counsel to ensure their employment practices are not in violation of this new law.  (FULL ARTICLE)

Trade Secrets 
Trade Secrets are the key to many business's success, especially in the absence of a patent or other forms of intellectual property protections in place. Proprietary information that entities exclusively know and use is what allows them to compete in their industries. When trade secrets become publicly known or known to a competitor, an entire business may be at stake. That is why any business that operates in reliance upon trade secrets must take specific precautions to limit the number of people who access such information and to place restrictions on those with whom it is shared. Requiring employees to agree not to disclose trade secrets and to follow certain protocols when accessing or using trade secrets is vital to a business's security. When a business shares its secrets with potential investors or partners, the interaction should be subject to a non-disclosure agreement. Security measures are the front line defense against the leaking of trade secrets, and imposing affirmative obligations not to disclose or use trade secrets gives businesses specific remedies against those who misappropriate their proprietary information. (FULL ARTICLE) 

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

August 2015 Newsletter

Yogi Patel - Tuesday, August 04, 2015

Dear valued clients and supporters: This month's newsletter will focus on: (1) the EEOC’s declaration that workplace discrimination based on sexual orientation is illegal; (2) the New York State Wage Board's unanimous vote to raise the minimum wage for restaurant workers in the fast food industry to $15 an hour; and (3) the Second Circuit's decision in Glatt v. Fox Searchlight Pictures, Inc., providing valuable clarity on the question of whether interns are "employees" -- and therefore entitled to minimum wage and overtime pay under the Federal Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law.

 

Sexual Orientation and the Workplace
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is at the heart of Federal anti-discrimination law. It prohibits employers with at least fifteen employees from discriminating on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. Sexual orientation discrimination is not expressly included on the list and several federal courts, both at the district court and appellate level, have previously held that the statute’s ban on sex discrimination did not encompass sexual orientation discrimination. But on July 15, 2015, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued a ruling finding that sexual orientation discrimination is “associational discrimination on the basis of sex.” Thus, adverse actions taken by employer on account of an employees sexual orientation will now be considered illegal by the EEOC and LGBT employees will have an independent, stand-alone basis to lodge a discrimination complaint before the EEOC under Title VII. It is too early to know how courts will view this new development, and of course most employers are also governed by State and local laws that may already prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.


Minimum Wage and Fast Food Industry Workers
The New York State Wage Board recently recommended raising the minimum wage for restaurant workers in the fast food industry to $15 an hour. In the event the Wage Order is accepted by the Commissioner in its current recommended form, the mandate would apply to all workers in fast-food restaurants that are part of chains with at least 30 outlets. More specifically, the change will apply to workers who cook, clean, serve customers, make deliveries, or perform routine maintenance work as part of their day-to-day duties. The proposed Wage Order, if implemented as is, will apply to all fast food restaurants associated with a chain of 30 or more outlets, irrespective of how many restaurants the individual employer owns. The proposal, once officially published, will then be followed by a 15-day public comment period. Comments will be accepted online and by mail. Based on those comments, the Commissioner may accept, reject or modify the Board's recommendations and file a Wage Order. The Wage Order must be filed within 45 days once the report is filed. The Order is then subject to an additional regulatory process thereafter. We will continue to monitor the situation and provide updates as the process progresses, but if you have specific questions about how this may affect you as an employee or an employer, please contact us.


Interns v. Employees
In Glatt v. Fox Searchlight Pictures, Inc., the action was brought by former production interns who worked on the Oscar-winning movie Black Swan, as well as a publicity intern at the company’s New York corporate office, all of whom were unpaid. The interns argued they should have been classified as employees and, thus, should have been compensated for their efforts. The law surrounding this issue has been unclear for several decades due to the guidance offered by the U.S. Department of Labor and conflicting interpretations by courts across the country, making it difficult for an employer to know how to comply. The Second Circuit, which covers New York, observed in Glatt that the question of an intern’s employment status is a highly individualized inquiry and not subject to a bright line rule. To assess whether interns are “trainees” under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) (and therefore “exempt” from overtime and minimum wage rules) or “employees" (and therefore entitled to the laws’ protections), the court adopted what it calls the “primary beneficiary” approach. Under the "primary beneficiary" test, there are at least seven independent factors that should be analyzed under the new approach to determine whether the position is truly an internship or an employment situation. Employers are advised to fully understand their obligations under Glatt prior to hiring an intern.


A more in-depth article on this issue, including the seven factors under the primary beneficiary approach will be posted here on our website shortly and readers are encouraged to follow us on Twitter (@lloydpatelllp) and Facebook to receive updates on this and other issues throughout the month.


Recent Posts


Tags

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

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.