On March 1, 2019, the New York State Department of Labor (NYSDOL) announced that it is no longer pursuing predictive scheduling regulations (or “call-in pay”) that would have affected most employers in the state. For the time being, New York employers do not have to worry about pending statewide regulations regarding call-in pay. Keep in mind, however, that New York City employers are still subject to the Fair Workweek Law.
The New York State Department of Labor (“DOL”) recently issued proposed statewide regulations that would require employers to pay employees “call-in pay” when employers use “on call” scheduling or change employees’ work shifts on short notice. This is not the DOL’s first foray into this area – in November 2017, the DOL released similar proposed regulations but ultimately declined to adopt them. The DOL’s new set of proposed regulations would apply to the vast majority of employers operating in New York, but are of particular interest to New York City retail employers, who regularly use “on call” scheduling, and who are already subject to the New York City Fair Workweek laws.
The expiration date for the U.S. Department of Labor’s (“DOL”) model Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”) notice and medical certification forms has once again been extended. The new expiration date is now August 31, 2018. Expiration dates are located at the top right corner of the model FMLA forms.
The U.S. Department of Labor’s (“DOL”) model Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”) notices and medical certification forms expire on July 31, 2018. However, the new model forms have not yet been released. The current FMLA forms were originally due to expire on May 31, 2018, but the expiration date was first extended to June 30, 2018 and then to July 31, 2018.
Last Friday, the Department of Labor (“DOL”) issued Field Assistance Bulletin No. 2018-4 to help guide the DOL Wage and Hour Division field staff as to the correct classification of home care, nurse, or caregiver registries under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”). This is the most recent piece of guidance on a topic first addressed by the DOL in a 1975 Opinion Letter. The bulletin is noteworthy in two respects. First, it confirms that the DOL continues to view a registry that simply refers caregivers to clients but controls no terms or conditions of the caregiver’s employment activities as outside the purview of the FLSA. Second, and most helpfully, the bulletin provides specific examples of common registry business practices that may establish the existence of an employment relationship under the FLSA.
One of the more controversial actions of the United States Department of Labor during the Obama Administration was its 2016 issuance of a Final Rule that was intended to radically rewrite the rules concerning the “Advice Exemption” to Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 (“LMRDA”). The 2016 Final Rule was hotly contested because it would have required employers and their labor law counsel to report concerning advice the lawyers provided even when the lawyers did not directly communicate with their client’s employees. For almost 50 years such attorney-client communications and dealings were exempt from reporting so long as the attorneys did not speak or otherwise communicate directly with their clients’ employees.
On January 5, 2018, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) announced that it would no longer be using the six-factor test it had adhered to since 2010 to determine whether interns are employees — and consequently, entitled to minimum wage and overtime — under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Instead, the DOL will now utilize the “primary beneficiary” test articulated by several U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals (including those covering New York and California) to make such a determination.
On September 5, 2017, the Department of Labor filed with the Fifth Circuit an unopposed motion asking the court to dismiss its appeal of the nationwide preliminary injunction ruling issued last November by a Judge Amos Mazzant in the Eastern District of Texas. The motion states that DOL’s appeal is moot in light of Judge Mazzant’s entry of final judgment on August 31, 2017. Barring any unusual further developments, we anticipate that the Fifth Circuit will dismiss the appeal promptly.
Since last November, much of the discussion regarding the Obama-era overtime regulations that, among other things, more than doubled the minimum salary threshold for executive, administrative, and professional employees under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) has focused on the Department of Labor’s appeal of the nationwide preliminary injunction barring implementation and enforcement of the rule.
While everyone is awaiting the oral argument before the Fifth Circuit, currently scheduled for October 3, 2017, Judge Amos Mazzant of the Eastern District of Texas once again issued a bold ruling sure to grab the public’s attention.
Employment and labor laws require employers to post state, federal and locally mandated posters where visible to employees that inform them of their employment and labor law rights. An employer’s failure to post such mandated posters can subject it to fines and penalties, as well as lawsuits. There have also been cases that have held that an employer’s failure to post a required labor law poster tolls the applicable statute of limitations for certain employment discrimination causes of action. Accordingly, an employer should routinely ensure that it is posting the required notices and that those notices are current and updated with the most recent version of the notice.