Firm: All
Practice Industry: Employment & Labor
Region: All
Country/ State: All
Tag: All

With respect to the situation caused by the pandemic and its possible data protection impacts, please find below a summary of the statement of the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) on the processing of personal data in the context of the COVID-19 outbreak, issued on 19 March 2020. The EDPB starts by emphasizing that “[d]ata protection rules (such as the GDPR) do not hinder measures taken in the fight against the coronavirus pandemic ...

Haynes and Boone, LLP | October 2002

A SUMMARY OF THE FINAL REGULATIONS ON THE STANDARDS FOR PRIVACY OF INDIVIDUALLY IDENTIFIABLE HEALTH INFORMATION ISSUED DECEMBER 28, 2000 AS MODIFIED BY THE FINAL REGULATIONS ISSUED ON AUGUST 14, 2002 CAVEAT: This outline summarizes the HIPAA Privacy Regulations as modified. No one should rely on this as legal advice. In every situation, the application of the rules requires careful analysis of a counsel who is familiar with your particular situation. I ...

Shoosmiths LLP | February 2024

Unexpectedly, Home Office guidance Employer’s guide to right to work checks has been updated to expand on the required steps for employers who are taking on an individual to carry out ‘supplementary employment’. It now helpfully gives clarification on what steps should be undertaken to ensure that right to work checks for this category of employees are done correctly ...

Brigard Urrutia | April 2020

Through this Circular, the Ministry of Work recalls that all employers are obligated to provide their employees with proper protection equipment with the safety and efficiency conditions required according to the risk´s nature ...

Shoosmiths LLP | February 2024

Employers are likely to have experienced some of their employees losing a baby before the 24 week mark. Employees may have been open about it with their employers; others may not have been especially if their pregnancy was in the early stages. The Government has just launched a new scheme for parents who experience a loss of pregnancy before 24 weeks. The scheme went live at 9am on 22 February 2024 and allows parents in this situation to request a baby loss certificate ...

Shoosmiths LLP | November 2021

Josh Cavallo has demonstrated enormous bravery by becoming the only current male professional footballer to come out as gay. We consider how employers can foster a workplace environment that is supportive of LGBTQ+ employees who choose to come out. This week Josh Cavallo of Adelaide United showed incredible courage by publicly announcing his sexuality ...

Shoosmiths LLP | March 2023

More and more employers are introducing paid fertility leave and a fertility leave policy to their workforce. For employers considering doing something similar, we explain the requirements for fertility leave and points to ponder when preparing a policy. Are employers required to provide time off for fertility treatment? There is no statutory right to provide staff with time off (paid or otherwise) for fertility or related treatment ...

Shoosmiths LLP | June 2023

Fertility is not only a ‘women’s issue’ - the impact of infertility on men can be enormous, yet regularly goes unnoticed. In light of Men’s Health Week and Father’s Day, we look at improving support for men who are experiencing fertility issues. When it comes to infertility, research and support predominantly centres around the perspectives of women ...

Shoosmiths LLP | February 2024

Recent surveys have revealed the shocking statistic that 90% of breastfeeding mothers are forced to use a toilet or are not provided with a suitable space to express their breastmilk at work. We look at what employers can do to rectify this issue in order to offer the appropriate level of support to new mums. Returning to work following maternity leave can be a daunting prospect, particularly if this is the first time that an employee has been apart from their baby for long periods of time ...

Haynes and Boone, LLP | February 2011

Here we go again! Consistent with its retaliation decisions over the past five years, the United States Supreme Court has revisited and expanded the scope of protection from retaliation under Title VII. In an 8-0 decision issued January 24, 2011, the high court expanded the scope of Title VII’s anti-retaliation provision by concluding that in certain situations, the statute allows an employee who has not personally engaged in protected activity to lodge a retaliation claim under the statute ...

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP | April 2019

The Supreme Court of the United States announced three cases will be argued next term that could determine whether Title VII protects LGBT employees from workplace discrimination.  Title VII prohibits discrimination because of “race, color, religion, sex, or national origin,” but it does not explicitly mention sexual orientation or gender identity ...

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP | January 2022

On Jan. 13, 2022, the Supreme Court of the United States lifted the injunction on the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) vaccine mandate (Mandate).[1] Previously, injunctions were imposed by district courts in Missouri and Louisiana, and affirmed on appeal by the Eighth and Fifth Circuits, respectively, thereby prohibiting enforcement of the Mandate in 24 states ...

Dykema | May 2018

Earlier this year, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision in Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis, resolving an issue on which several Courts of Appeals and various federal agencies and administrations had disagreed. At issue in Epic Systems (and two companion cases presenting the same issue: Ernst & Young LLP. v. Morris and National Labor Relations Board v. Murphy Oil USA, Inc ...

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP | January 2022

On Jan. 13, 2022, the United States Supreme Court issued an order blocking enforcement of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s (OSHA) Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS) requiring (among other things) employers of 100 or more employees to require employees to be vaccinated against COVID-19 or ensure unvaccinated employees are tested for COVID-19 weekly ...

Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP | October 2023

phttps://www.huntonak.com/images/content/9/3/v2/93738/sc-clarifies-undue-hardship-standard-for-title-vii-religious-acc ...

Haynes and Boone, LLP | June 2015

On June 1, the United States Supreme Court reversed and remanded Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc.1 to the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals and held that in order to prove a disparate-treatment (or “intentional discrimination”) claim, an applicant need only show that his need for a religious accommodation was a motivating factor in an employer’s decision not to hire him ...

Hanson Bridgett LLP | March 2021

Key Points Historic definition of "public works" expanded beyond construction-related activities Supreme Court holds that some special districts must pay prevailing wages to workers performing non-infrastructure related tasks Full extent of coverage of prevailing wages for operational contract workers is unclear   Labor Code Section 1720(a)(1) defines a "public work" as "construction, alteration, demolition, installation, or repair work done under contract and paid for in wh

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP | December 2017

On December 11, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to accept an application to appeal the court of appeals decision in Evans v. Georgia Regional Hospital, leaving unresolved a circuit split on whether federal law prohibits employment discrimination based on sexual orientation.[1] In Evans, the plaintiff, a security officer at a Georgia hospital, claimed she had been harassed and passed over for a promotion because she was homosexual ...

Lawson Lundell LLP | August 2008

On July 17, 2008, the Supreme Court of Canada in Hydro-Québec v. Syndicat des employé-e-s de techniques professionnelles et de bureau d'Hydro-Québec, 2008 SCC 43 clarified that there are limits to the employer’s duty to accommodate ...

Lawson Lundell LLP | June 2008

On June 27, 2008, the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) released its decision in Keays v. Honda Canada Inc. and overturned the decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal and narrowed the scope of Wallace damages for the “bad faith” manner of dismissal. This decision arises from a decision of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice which awarded $500,000 in punitive damages to a dismissed employee in addition to 24 months salary in lieu of notice ...

Lavery Lawyers | July 2013

The Supreme Court of Canada recently rendered a divided decision in which it concluded that an employer’s policy imposing mandatory random alcohol testing was not justified.1 This decision is of interest to employers in Quebec since it confirms arbitral case law on the subject. Background In 2006, Irving Pulp & Paper, Ltd. (“Irving” or the “employer”) unilaterally adopted a policy on the consumption of alcohol and other drugs (the “policy”) ...

FISCHER (FBC & Co.) | July 2020

In March, due to the spread of the coronavirus (COVID-19) the Ministry of Health established that an employee required to quarantine at home in accordance with Ministry of Health guidelines would automatically receive a sick leave certificate which could present to the employer and receive sick pay for the quarantine period ...

    Supreme Court Ruling Sets the Foundation for GST on Secondment of Employees     AUTHOR: Reena Asthana Khair Senior Partner and Head International Trade & Indirect Taxation Kochhar & Co. EMAIL: [email protected]   Japanese Multinational companies often share their talent pool across borders and jurisdictions by secondment of Japanese nationals ...

Shoosmiths LLP | December 2022

The Supreme Court will decide if historic holiday pay claims can be brought where there are gaps of three months or more between a series of underpayments. The outcome could have significant implications for employers across the UK ...

Waller | January 2022

Today, the Supreme Court issued decisions in the COVID mandate cases that have had employers across the country on the edge of their seats. In aper curiam6-3 decision, the Court stayed the OSHA Emergency Temporary Standard that required all employers with 100 or more employees to require COVID vaccination or weekly testing ...

dots