By Annette Tyman, Lawrence Z. Lorber, and Michael L. Childers

Seyfarth Synopsis: The Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (“OFCCP”) is closing the summer by issuing two new enforcement directives. The first, Directive 2018-03, clarifies the OFCCP’s enforcement of religious non-discrimination in light of recent court decisions and executive orders. The second

By Annette Tyman and Michael L. Childers

Seyfarth Synopsis: Federal Contractors should immediately update the Disability Self-ID Form to include the new expiration date.  The OFCCP is allowing a 10-day grace period, until February 10th to update the form.

Last week we updated contractors on OMB’s renewal of the disability self-identification form (see post here)

By Annette Tyman, Lawrence Z. Lorber, Jaclyn W. Hamlin, and Brent I. Clark

 

Seyfarth Synopsis: The first of several anticipated challenges to Executive Order 13673, “Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces,” has resulted in a preliminary injunction staying the implementation of some – but not all – aspects of the Executive Order and

By Pamela Q. Devata, Cameron Smith, and Courtney S. Stieber

On April 16, 2015, the New York City Council passed Intro-261-A, a bill that would amend the New York City Human Rights Law to make it an unlawful discriminatory practice for an employer to use an individual’s consumer credit history in making employment decisions.

By: Tracy Billows

Although employers are not required by law to have employee handbooks, if an employer chooses to go down such a path, legal compliance and being current with latest trends is a must. A non-compliant employee handbook can be used in claims of discrimination, union grievances, and other employee-employer disputes. Does your employee

By: Alexander J. Passantino, Paul H. Kehoe, and Lawrence Z. Lorber

On March 6, 2015, the Department of Labor submitted its final guidance pursuant to Executive Order 13673, titled Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces, to the White House’s Office of Management and Budget’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (“OIRA”) for review. Review

By: Paul KehoeMeredith  C.  BaileyLawrence Z. Lorber and Annette Tyman

On January 28, 2015, the Department of Labor’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (“OFCCP”) announced a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (“NPRM”) to update its Sex Discrimination Guidelines (the “Guidelines”).  The NPRM will be published in the Federal Register on January

By Clark Smith

A One-Two Punch For Employers 

Last July, we alerted you to a Fifth Circuit decision that limited the whistleblower protections of the Dodd‑Frank Act of 2010. In that case, the court held that Dodd‑Frank protects whistleblowers only if they report a securities-law violation directly to the Securities Exchange Commission (“SEC”), as opposed to just making an internal complaint. This month, in Villanueva v. U.S. Department of Labor, the Fifth Circuit published a decision curtailing the reach of whistleblower protections under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (“SOX”). Taken in tandem, these two decisions are welcome news for energy employers because they significantly restrict the reach of whistleblower protections, particularly for employees working outside the U.S., who may be disinclined to make complaints directly to the SEC or who may rely on alleged violations of foreign laws to make their case.

SOX protects employees of publicly-traded companies who engage in certain protected activities such as reporting violations of certain federal laws, such as mail and wire fraud.  SOX creates a private cause of action for employees who have been retaliated against for engaging in such protected activities. Last week, in Villanueva, the Fifth Circuit ruled that SOX’s whistleblower provision only protects reporting violations of U.S. federal law. 
Continue Reading Another Victory for Energy Employers: The Fifth Circuit Limits SOX Whistleblower Suits to Violations of U.S. Federal Law

By Angelo A. Paparelli

Samuel Herbert, Her Majesty’s Home Secretary from 1931-32 (the British equivalent of the U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security), could well have been speaking about two recent immigration-related events when he quipped that “bureaucracy” is “a difficulty for every solution.”

One is an October 30 Settlement Agreement between Indian It consulting giant, Infosys, and the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Texas.The other is an October 18 decision by U.S. federal district court judge, William J. Martini, involving the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) and CAMO Technologies, a much smaller Indian IT consulting firm.  

Both reflect a victory, of sorts, for Indian IT firms over U.S. immigration bureaucrats and enforcement agents, and both shed light on the little-discussed crossroads where ambiguous immigration rules bisect the relations between corporate customers and their technology consultants.
Continue Reading Four Post-Infosys Strategies for Corporate Customers and Consultants to Minimize Immigration Risks