Tag Archives: retail

ILN Today Post

Key Considerations for Retailers in the Face of COVID-19

Retailers are facing unprecedented challenges in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic. While some companies, such as wholesalers of essential household items and groceries, are experiencing a surge in demand, others, especially those that rely on a brick-and-mortar presence, are suffering. Recent reports show that retail sales had plummeted in March 2020 to a degree never before seen. All retailers are forced to confront the “new normal,” in particular taking steps to attempt to shift all, or substantially all, of their business online. Read more…

Read full article

Take 5 Newsletter – Retail Employers Continue to Face a Myriad of Challenges in the Workplace

This edition of Take 5 highlights compliance with cutting-edge issues—such as pay equity, workplace violence, and artificial intelligence (“AI”)—that have a significant impact on retailers. We also provide an update on National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”) compliance and New York City drug testing to assist you in navigating an increasingly complex legal landscape.

Read more

Read full article

Predictive Scheduling is Becoming the New Normal for Hospitality and Retail Industry

Taking the guesswork out of scheduling for wage workers is an attractive proposition for regulators. Laws that require employers to publish employee work schedules a certain amount of time in advance so that employees (especially those in the hospitality and retail industries) can have greater flexibility and work-time predictability to deal with family and other events and responsibilities are becoming more common in several cities, and the state of Oregon currently has predictive scheduling laws on the books, and the trend is growing, with proposed legislation in many jurisdictions across the country.

Read more

Read full article

California Court of Appeal Concludes That Certain Types of On-Call Scheduling Triggers Requirement to Pay Wages

On February 4, 2019, a divided panel of the California Court of Appeal issued their majority and dissenting opinion in Ward v. Tilly’s, Inc.  It appears to be a precedent-setting decision in California, holding that an employee scheduled for an on-call shift may be entitled to certain wages for that shift despite never physically reporting to work.

Read more

Read full article

State Ban the Box Law Enforced for the First Time by Massachusetts Attorney General

Our colleague  at Epstein Becker Green has a post on the Hospitality Labor and Employment Law blog that will be of interest to our readers in the retail industry: “Massachusetts Attorney General Enforces State Ban the Box Law for First Time, Fining Three Businesses and Issuing Warnings to 17 Others.”

Read more

Read full article

Massachusetts Attorney General Enforces State Ban the Box Law for First Time, Fining Three Businesses and Issuing Warnings to 17 Others

Massachusetts is one of many states which have adopted legislation, commonly known as a “ban the box” law, prohibiting public and private employers from requesting criminal record information in a prospective employee’s “initial written employment application” and limiting the type and scope of questions an employer may ask a candidate following receipt of an “initial written employment application.” Yesterday, Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey announced that her office has settled with four businesses and issued warning letters to 17 others for violations of Massachusetts’s ban the box law, marking the first enforcement efforts by the Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office.

Read more

Read full article
ILN Today Post

Car parking: display or pay!

Summary

The owner of a shop claimed rights to park on an adjoining car park on the basis that it had acquired rights to do so over a period of 20 years’ use. As the car park owner had maintained clearly visible private car park signs, these were indicative of its continuing objection to unauthorised parking and were enough to stop the shop owner acquiring rights.

Facts of the case

The issue arose in a Court of Appeal case[1] relating to a dispute between the owners of a fish and chip shop and an adjoining social club.

Read More

Read full article

Nike Prevails in California Bag Check Case Continue Reading…

Because of concerns about employee theft, many employers have implemented practices whereby employees are screened before leaving work to ensure they are not taking merchandise with them.  While these practices are often implemented in retail stores, other employers use them as well when employees have access to items that could be slipped into a bag or a purse.

Over the last several years, the plaintiffs’ bar has brought a great many class actions and collective actions against employers across the country, alleging that hourly employees are entitled to be paid for the time they spend waiting to have their bags inspected when leaving work.  These lawsuits are often referred to as “bag check” cases.

Read full article
ILN Today Post

Veto rights in contracts: can they be exercised freely?

Parties to commercial contracts generally assume that the express written terms of a contact will be given effect relatively strictly under English law.

However, recent court decisions illustrate the courts’ willingness to look beyond the written terms of contracts and to imply unwritten terms in order to give effect to what they consider to have been the parties’ intentions.

Overview

In one recent case, the High Court decided that a clause in a share option agreement – which stated that the option could only be exercised with the consent of the board of directors of the granting company – did not give the board an unequivocal veto.

Read More

Read full article

California Supreme Court Gives Employers a Break on “Day of Rest” Laws

It is no secret that California’s wage-hour laws are complex and often raise questions that employers, employees and the courts struggle with. As we wrote here more than a year ago, faced with questions regarding California’s ambiguous “day of rest” laws, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals threw up its hands and asked the California Supreme Court to clarify those laws.

Among the questions to be answered was one that impacts a great many employers, particularly those in the retail and hospitality industries – does the requirement that an employee be provided a “day of rest” apply to each workweek (such that an employee could be scheduled to work 12 consecutive days over two workweeks), or does it apply to each rolling, 7-day period (such that employees could never be scheduled to work more than 6 consecutive days)?

Read full article