.
  LATEST ARTICLE
ONBOARDING: MAKING THE MOST OF THAT “FIRST DATE” WITH YOUR EMPLOYEES

U.S. AIRWAYS, INC. V. MCCUTCHEN: SCOTUS SAYS ENFORCEMENT OF ERISA PLAN TERMS IS NOT “INEQUITABLE”

By Sara E. Hauptfuehrer | Published: June 14, 2013

Employer-sponsored group heath plans typically allow reimbursement to the plan for benefits paid in connection with injuries sustained as a result the tortious conduct of a third party.  That right of reimbursement arises when the injured plan participant obtains a recovery against the tortfeasor and is enforceable, as an equitable lien by contract, against the proceeds of any recovery.  Plan terms also, as an alternative remedy, subrogate the plan to the rights of the injured participant and allow the plan to pursue the participant’s tort claim in its own name.  Read More »

Posted in Employee Benefits/ERISA, General Employer Interest | Leave a comment

WV LEGISLATURE ALLOWS FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES IN CERTAIN WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CLAIMS

By Alyssa A. Sloan | Published: June 10, 2013

In 2009, the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals created a formal Access to Justice program for the State of West Virginia.  The Access to Justice program was established to determine the needs of citizens accessing the justice system in the state.  One of the issues identified by the Access to Justice Commission was the lack of ability for claimants to obtain counsel in the litigation of denied medical treatment issues in workers’ compensation claims.  Accordingly, Supreme Court Justice Brent Benjamin formed a committee to address this issue.

Read More »

Posted in General Employer Interest, Workers’ Compensation | Leave a comment

THIRD CIRCUIT AGREES WITH NOEL CANNING; IS THE 2ND COURT TO INVALIDATE NLRB RECESS APPOINTMENTS

By Joseph U. Leonoro | Published: June 5, 2013

If you are a regular reader of this blog, you know that the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) has been the subject of a great deal of court attention during the Obama Administration.  Halfway through 2013, that train is still rolling and shows no sign of slowing down anytime soon.

Read More »

Posted in General Employer Interest, Labor Relations/NLRB | Leave a comment

IT DOESN’T MATTER HOW EVERYONE ELSE DOES IT — AT LEAST NOT IN WV

By Matthew B. Hansberry | Published: May 31, 2013

Sadly, the law can be a jealous mistress.  For purposes of this piece, my point is that the law really doesn’t care about how others conduct their businesses; she only cares about whether you’re following occasionally tricky and sometimes convoluted directives.  If you think that I’m kidding, wait until the West Virginia Division of Labor (“DOL”) knocks on your door one day. 

Read More »

Posted in General Employer Interest, Human Relations, Wage and Hour | Leave a comment

“FULL OF SOUND AND FURY, SIGNIFYING (ALMOST) NOTHING”: SUPREME COURT PASSES ON LARGER ISSUES IN FLSA COLLECTIVE ACTION DECISION

By Daniel D. Fassio | Published: May 28, 2013

Though traditional class actions have long been barred under the Fair Labor Standards Act, Congress provided within the statute a provision allowing “collective actions.”  The provision provided a vehicle for groups of employees with similar grievances to be represented by a representative plaintiff.  Though the mechanics functioned slightly differently (i.e., potential plaintiffs in an FLSA collective action must opt-in to the suit, rather than opting out under traditional class action rules), the general premise was the same.  These actions could carry high costs for employers, especially when large numbers of employees were included in the collective action.  One particular strategy which has been developed for dealing with class actions and collective actions is using an “offer of judgment” under Rule 68 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to render moot the lead or representative plaintiff’s claim.  Read More »

Posted in General Employer Interest, Wage and Hour | Leave a comment

IT’S A LITTLE TOO LITTLE: IS THE NLRB HEADED TOWARDS IRRELEVANCE?

By Todd L. Sarver | Published: May 22, 2013

 In my last blog post, which can be found here, I observed that it seemed the NLRB had “jumped the shark” and lost its relevance. I suggested that one way to restore some legitimacy to the NLRB was to appoint true “neutral” Board members culled from a pool of neutral arbitrators.  Alas, the President must not read this blog.  Read More »

Posted in General Employer Interest, Labor Relations/NLRB | Leave a comment

WHERE THE RUBBER MEETS THE ROAD: FOURTH CIRCUIT SAYS ONLY THOSE ALLEGATIONS INCLUDED IN A PLAINTIFF’S EEOC CHARGE ARE FAIR GAME IN A TITLE VII LAWSUIT

By Julie Arbore | Published: May 16, 2013

When employers are hauled into Court and sued for discrimination after already defending a charge for the same conduct in front of the EEOC or state human rights agency, they usually have a pretty good idea what they are defending.  Sometimes employees try to play hide-the-ball with their allegations, however, and that makes those suits harder to defend.  Fortunately for employers, at least one Court has taken a stand against that kind of subterfuge. 

Read More »

Posted in Discrimination (Title VII / EEO), General Employer Interest | Leave a comment

FOLLOWING NOEL CANNING, THE DC CIRCUIT AGAIN OVERTURNS NLRB ACTION & INVALIDATES NOTICE POSTING REQUIREMENT

By Mario R. Bordogna | Published: May 9, 2013

For the second time this year, the D.C. Circuit has proven to be quite a thorn in the side of the National Labor Relations Board. 

Read More »

Posted in General Employer Interest, Labor Relations/NLRB | Leave a comment

WAGE PAYMENT AND COLLECTION ACT: MORE TIME TO PAY DISCHARGED EMPLOYEES IN WEST VIRGINIA?

By Jami Suver | Published: May 2, 2013

If West Virginia Governor Earl Ray Tomblin signs a bill currently on his desk, West Virginia employers will have more time to pay final wages to discharged employees.   Prior to its pending amendment, the Wage Payment and Collection Act required that employers pay discharged employees within 72 hours of termination.  Senate Bill 355, approved by West Virginia’s Legislature, instead requires payment to discharged employees no later than the next regular payday or four business days, whichever comes first.  “Business days” include days on which state offices are open for regular business.  Payment is to be made through regular pay channels or, if requested by the discharged employee, by mail. 

Read More »

Posted in General Employer Interest, Wage and Hour | Leave a comment

MUST EMPLOYERS CARRY MEDICARE ELIGIBLE ACTIVE EMPLOYEES AND SPOUSES?

By Keisha N. Jackson | Published: April 26, 2013

As health care costs continue to rise, many employers are considering creative solutions for keeping costs low without drastically changing the benefits offered to active employees.  Active employees who have spouses on Medicare or who are themselves eligible for Medicare may have become more attractive in the cost-benefit analysis done by employers.   Some employers report rate jumps of an average of 25% per year in the past four years for Medicare eligible spouses of active employees.  But, don’t be fooled.  Employers must resist the temptation to treat Medicare eligible active employees and/or their spouses differently than non-Medicare eligible active employees and spouses.    Read More »

Posted in Employee Benefits/ERISA, General Employer Interest | Leave a comment

CONNECT WITH STEPTOE & JOHNSON

LexisNexis Labor & Employment Law Community 2011 Top 50 Blogs