Our colleague Alden Bianchi was a guest on a recent episode of Bloomberg Tax’s “Talking Tax” podcast, discussing the U.S. Department of Labor’s new rules for Association Health Plans, which change the standards for determining which small employers are permitted to band together to form, maintain, and participate in single, large group health plans. Click here to listen, and stay tuned for Alden’s upcoming blog series on this topic!
The U.S. Department of Labor recently issued a final regulation green-lighting the expanded adoption of “association health plans” (or “AHPs”) by self-employed individuals and small businesses. This new rule is in response to an Executive Order issued last October in which President Trump sought to, among other things, “expand access to more affordable health coverage by permitting more employers to form AHPs.” In an article recently published by Bloomberg Tax, Alden Bianchi explains the background and contend of this new and important regulation and offers some predictions about the rule’s future
Over the past several years, health care entities have increasingly become the target of private and government plaintiffs complaining of disability discrimination. A crescendo of litigation has engulfed the health care industry—and most notably of late, “drive-by” litigation attacking the perceived failure of health care entity facilities and websites to accommodate the needs of persons with disabilities consistent with the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
Read the full article below or here: The Rising Tide of ADA Litigation Against Health Care Entities (©Copyright 2018, American Health Lawyers Association, Washington, DC. Reprint permission granted.)
Welcome back for this month’s edition of the Bubbler! There’s plenty to talk about, so let’s jump right in.
The California Supreme Court issued an important decision this week addressing the test for whether a worker is an independent contractor or an employee. The U.S. Supreme Court declined to review a Seventh Circuit decision upholding an employer’s rule that a months-long leave of absence was not a reasonable accommodation. The Ninth Circuit held that employers are prohibited from using an employee’s past salary as a legitimate “factor other than sex” for purposes of defeating a Fair Pay Act claim, emphasizing that allowing the inclusion of prior salaries would only perpetuate gender pay disparity. The Fifth Circuit downsized ERISA fiduciary standards in a ruling that invalidated a set of seven expansive fiduciary rules. The Northern District of Illinois issued an unusual ruling, holding that two plaintiffs’ claims were subject to an enforceable arbitration agreement, yet refused to compel arbitration. The DOJ challenged a set of competitors’ no-poaching agreements as per se violations of the Sherman Act, which regulates concerted anti-competitive action. Finally, in the wake of the #MeToo movement, New York (state and city) have passed new laws concerning workplace sexual harassment.
As always, stay tuned for more employment matters updates!
In the wake of the #MeToo movement and the nationwide discourse over the prevalence of sexual harassment in the workplace, New York State and New York City have taken aggressive steps to implement stronger protections against workplace harassment. These new protections, which are now law in New York State and New York City, will require New York employers to revise their policies, procedures and agreements, deliver new training, and provide employees with additional information about sexual harassment. Below, we summarize the new requirements and other changes in the law and discuss next steps.
On April 3, 2018, the Department of Justice Antitrust Division (“DOJ” or “Antitrust Division”) filed an antitrust complaint against Knorr-Bremse AG (“Knorr”) and Westinghouse Air Brake Technologies Corporation (“Wabtec”) for agreeing not to “solicit, recruit, hire without prior approval, or otherwise compete for employees” (collectively, “no-poach agreements”). According to the complaint, Knorr and Wabtec are “each other’s top competitors for rail equipment used in freight and passenger rail applications” and also compete with each other to “attract, hire and retain various skilled employees, including rail industry project managers, engineers, sales executives, business unit heads, and corporate officers.”
What’s a financial advisor to do? On March 15, 2018, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in Chamber of Commerce of the U.S. v. U.S. Dep’t. of Labor, No. 17-10238, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 6472 (5th Cir. Mar. 15, 2018) vacated – thereby invalidating – a series of seven rules (which we collectively refer to in this post as the “fiduciary rule”) issued in April 2016 by the Department of Labor (DOL). The fiduciary rule vastly expanded the reach of the ERISA fiduciary standards that apply to individuals and entities providing investment advice. This post first explains the state of the law prior to the fiduciary rule; it then discusses the impact of the rule on the arguments that the Court grappled with; and it concludes by handicapping the options available to regulated financial advisors and institutions as they endeavor to respond.
Now that the Massachusetts Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) went into effect April 1, 2018, it is time for employers to confirm that they are taking steps to ensure compliance with the PWFA.
Join us in a discussion on the increasingly complex landscape of employee misclassification as we explore best practices to help your company avoid the costly pitfalls and time consuming litigation that can result from this expensive mistake.
Join me in a discussion on the increasingly nuanced landscape of employee workplace investigations and best practices in managing their effect on corporate brand, attorney-client privilege and obligations to applicable governmental entities.