Employment Matters Blog

Another One Bites the Dust – Court Strikes Down Non-Solicitation Agreement as Overbroad under New York Law

Posted in employee mobility, non solicitation, Non-compete, restrictive covenants

Auto Parts non-solicitation agreementWritten by Daniel Long

The latest casualty to post-employment covenants came at the hands of a Connecticut trial court, which struck down a non-solicitation agreement under New York law as reaching beyond the legitimate business interests that deserve protection.

Continue Reading

Title VII Severance Agreement Issue Remains in Legal Limbo: Judge Tosses EEOC’s Suit Against CVS Solely on Procedural Grounds

Posted in conciliation, EEOC, release, Title VII

CVS Pharmacy EEOC Title VIIWritten by Daniel Long

Last month, we reported that an Illinois district court judge threw out the EEOC’s controversial lawsuit against CVS seeking to invalidate its severance agreements.  The judge there did so and promised to follow up with a written opinion.  That opinion has now arrived, but it’s not the one that we hoped for.  Rather than address whether CVS’s standard severance agreement violated its employees’ rights under Title VII, Judge Darrah focused solely on certain procedural shortcomings; namely, that the EEOC had failed to engage in any conciliation prior to bringing the lawsuit.

Continue Reading

Et tu, Brutus? Yet Another New York Court Offers Guidance on the Do’s and Don’ts (Mostly Don’ts) in Post-Employment Restrictive Covenant Agreements

Posted in employee mobility, New York, non solicitation, Non-compete, restrictive covenants

Post-Employment Restrictive Covenant AgreementsWritten by David Katz

A recent non-compete case out of a New York County court offers employers valuable drafting tips on non-compete and non-solicitation provisions.

Continue Reading

The Affordable Care Act—Countdown to Compliance for Employers, Week 10: What’s an Employer to Do (with Marketplace Notices)?

Posted in ACA Compliance Series, Affordable Care Act, IRS

Written by Alden J. Bianchi

Under the Affordable Care Act’s employer shared responsibility rules, applicable large employers (those with 50 or more full-time and full-time equivalent employees on business days during the preceding calendar year) incur exposure for assessable payments under Internal Revenue Code § 4980H when an applicable premium tax credit or cost-sharing reduction is allowed or paid for one or more low- or moderate-income full-time employees who have been certified to the employer as qualifying for an advance premium tax credit under Code § 36B. The final Code § 4980H regulations refer to this certification as a “Section 1411 Certification,” which is a reference to Act § 1411(a). This provision gives the Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) the authority to determine whether individuals are eligible to enroll in qualified health plans through a public exchange and whether they are eligible for a premium tax credit. Continue Reading

Keep Your Hands Off the Customers … and the Cows

Posted in employee mobility, minimum wage, non solicitation, Non-compete, restrictive covenants

Written by Jennifer Rubin

A federal district court in Washington has confirmed that an employer’s relationship with the cows that its employees serviced is insufficient to establish a legitimate protectable interest to enforce a non-compete.

Yes, the court’s decision in Genex Cooperative, Inc. v. Contreras not only confirmed that bovine inseminators were free to solicit their prior clients (and cows), but the case provides some good reminders about drafting enforceable non-competes.

The case involved three bovine inseminators who, unhappy with their wages and working conditions (which included the failure to adhere to state minimum wage laws) quit their jobs with Genex and, the next day joined its competitor CRV USA — who immediately put them to work inseminating the cows of Genex customers. Continue Reading

SHRM: Employees’ Use of Sharing Economy Poses Risk

Posted in employer liability, independent contractor, workers compensation

My colleague Mitch Danzig was quoted in a SHRM article entitled Employees’ Use of Sharing Economy Poses Risks in which he comments on the risk employers face when requiring employees to use shared economy services such as Uber or Airbnb. The article focuses on how employers should tackle the booming sharing economy in regards to business travel, as well as the sharing industry’s future legal landscape.

HR Morning: High Court’s Decision Could End Up Costing Employers Big

Posted in Compensation, staffing, Supreme Court

My colleague Jim Nicholas was quoted in an HR Morning article entitled High Court’s Decision Could End Up Costing Employers Big in which he comments on Integrity Staffing Solutions, Inc. v. Jesse Busk, et al., a case pending in the Supreme Court on compensable vs non-compensable activities for employees. The article focuses on different facets of the issue, the justices’ viewpoints about the case, and its possible implications for all employers.

The Affordable Care Act—Countdown to Compliance for Employers, Week 11: Rethinking ACA Compliance Strategies Involving Reference Pricing Models and “MVP” Arrangements

Posted in ACA Compliance Series, Affordable Care Act, IRS

Written by Alden J. Bianchi

Under the Affordable Care Act’s rules governing employer shared responsibility—which are codified in Internal Revenue Code § 4980H—where an applicable large employer makes an offer of group health plan coverage that is both “affordable” and provides “minimum value” to substantially all of its full-time employees, the employer is not liable for assessable payments under Code § 4980H. (Final regulations under Code § 4980H are available here; and a set of Questions and Answers prepared by the IRS describing the final rules can be accessed here.)

In an effort to drive down the cost of complying with these rules, certain applicable large employers—principally those in industries in which coverage was not previously offered across-the-board to most, if not all, full-time employees—have sought less expensive ways to offer coverage that is both “affordable” and provides “minimum value.” In an earlier post we described some of the emerging compliance strategies, which included the reference pricing models and “MVP arrangements” that some employers were considering. Continue Reading

Fail to Pay Wages in D.C. and Get Sued With Some of Your Closest Friends (and Contractors)

Posted in Employment Legislation, staffing, Wage and Hour

Written by Tyrone P. Thomas (follow Tyrone on Twitter at https://twitter.com/tyronepthomas)

If you are a D.C. employer, temporary staffing agency, contractor or subcontractor, you have yet another wage and hour law to contend with: The Wage Theft Prevention Amendment Act of 2014.  Among other things, the law introduces new penalties for failure to pay earned wages and exposes to liability related entities that have no relationship to the employee.  Here are the highlights:

Continue Reading

New York City Council Continues Push to Ban Credit Checks in Connection with Employment Decisions

Posted in Applicant, background checks, consumer report, credit report, Employment Legislation, New York

New York Skyline Civil Rights LawWritten by Michael Arnold

The New York City Council’s Committee on Civil Rights recently held a hearing on a bill that would amend the New York City Human Rights Law to prohibit employers from basing an employment decision on the consumer credit history of an applicant or employee.

Continue Reading