Fisher Phillips News

AI is quickly becoming an essential operational and strategic tool for employers in all industries, and manufacturing is no exception. From optimizing organizations' HR functions to ensuring work environments are safe and productive, AI is influencing just about every aspect of work. And we are just scratching the surface on understanding the value this technology can drive. In this two-part episode of "Manufacturing Success," Michael Carrouth is joined by David Walton, the Chair of Fisher Phillips' Artificial Intelligence Team, for a discussion about how manufacturing employers can and should leverage this technology, and how doing so correctly can create a sustainable competitive advantage for any manufacturing employer.

AI is quickly becoming an essential operational and strategic tool for employers in all industries, and manufacturing is no exception. From optimizing organizations' HR functions to ensuring work environments are safe and productive, AI is influencing just about every aspect of work. And we are just scratching the surface on understanding the value this technology can drive. In this two-part episode of "Manufacturing Success," Michael Carrouth is joined by David Walton, the Chair of Fisher Phillips' Artificial Intelligence Team, for a discussion about how manufacturing employers can and should leverage this technology, and how doing so correctly can create a sustainable competitive advantage for any manufacturing employer.

Much has been written about an historically low unemployment rate, and the related challenges that manufacturing employers face in trying to fill a significant backlog of job openings. Despite this glut of available jobs, the need to implement reductions in force (RIFs) does present itself more often than might be expected, for a wide range of business reasons that are disconnected from unemployment figures. And like other aspects of employment law, there are associated rules and best practices that can go a long way to reducing, or even eliminating, the risk of legal missteps on the part of management. Manufacturing employers should take care to become familiar with these rules and best practices, to minimize the threat of business disruption that often accompanies RIFs. In this three-part episode of Manufacturing Success, host Mike Carrouth is joined by Fisher Phillips attorneys J. Hagood Tighe, David Kresser, and Terri Stewart for discussions around the three core elements of a successful RIF; layoff planning, notice requirements, and severance agreements. For more information about RIFs, please refer to: An Employer's 7-Step RIF and Layoff Blueprint for 2023 RIF/WARN Toolkit

Much has been written about an historically low unemployment rate, and the related challenges that manufacturing employers face in trying to fill a significant backlog of job openings. Despite this glut of available jobs, the need to implement reductions in force (RIFs) does present itself more often than might be expected, for a wide range of business reasons that are disconnected from unemployment figures. And like other aspects of employment law, there are associated rules and best practices that can go a long way to reducing, or even eliminating, the risk of legal missteps on the part of management. Manufacturing employers should take care to become familiar with these rules and best practices, to minimize the threat of business disruption that often accompanies RIFs. In this three-part episode of Manufacturing Success, host Mike Carrouth is joined by Fisher Phillips attorneys J. Hagood Tighe, David Kresser, and Terri Stewart for discussions around the three core elements of a successful RIF; layoff planning, notice requirements, and severance agreements. For more information about RIFs, please refer to: An Employer's 7-Step RIF and Layoff Blueprint for 2023 RIF/WARN Toolkit

Much has been written about an historically low unemployment rate, and the related challenges that manufacturing employers face in trying to fill a significant backlog of job openings. Despite this glut of available jobs, the need to implement reductions in force (RIFs) does present itself more often than might be expected, for a wide range of business reasons that are disconnected from unemployment figures. And like other aspects of employment law, there are associated rules and best practices that can go a long way to reducing, or even eliminating, the risk of legal missteps on the part of management. Manufacturing employers should take care to become familiar with these rules and best practices, to minimize the threat of business disruption that often accompanies RIFs. In this three-part episode of Manufacturing Success, host Mike Carrouth is joined by Fisher Phillips attorneys J. Hagood Tighe, David Kresser, and Terri Stewart for discussions around the three core elements of a successful RIF; layoff planning, notice requirements, and severance agreements. For more information about RIFs, please refer to: An Employer's 7-Step RIF and Layoff Blueprint for 2023 RIF/WARN Toolkit

Issues concerning workplace safety represent a significant source of challenges to employers' approach to legal compliance. This is the case across industries, however for obvious reasons the threat is especially acute for manufacturers. And while this reality is hardly newsworthy on its own, the COVID-19 pandemic has for three years forced a dramatic reallocation of OSHA's time and energy. But with the ebb of certain pandemic-era safety mandates, comes an offsetting – and in some cases enhanced – flow of priorities more suited to “normal” times. Manufacturing employers would be well advised to become reacquainted with OSHA's typical posture, as well as the practical steps that can be taken to reduce your risk profile. In this two-part episode of Manufacturing Success, host Mike Carrouth is joined by Curt Moore, a partner in the Charlotte office and senior member of the Workplace Safety Practice Group at Fisher Phillips. Part 1 outlines certain of the current and emerging trends that employers can expect to confront concerning priority actions at OSHA, and Part 2 offers a practical assessment of what employers can do to ensure a level of safety and compliance in the workplace that reduces the risk of being selected for an OSHA inspection. Click here to listen to Part 1.

Issues concerning workplace safety represent a significant source of challenges to employers' approach to legal compliance. This is the case across industries, however for obvious reasons the threat is especially acute for manufacturers. And while this reality is hardly newsworthy on its own, the COVID-19 pandemic has for three years forced a dramatic reallocation of OSHA's time and energy. But with the ebb of certain pandemic-era safety mandates, comes an offsetting – and in some cases enhanced – flow of priorities more suited to “normal” times. Manufacturing employers would be well advised to become reacquainted with OSHA's typical posture, as well as the practical steps that can be taken to reduce your risk profile. In this two-part episode of Manufacturing Success, host Mike Carrouth is joined by Curt Moore, a partner in the Charlotte office and senior member of the Workplace Safety Practice Group at Fisher Phillips. Part 1 outlines certain of the current and emerging trends that employers can expect to confront concerning priority actions at OSHA, and Part 2 offers a practical assessment of what employers can do to ensure a level of safety and compliance in the workplace that reduces the risk of being selected for an OSHA inspection. Click here to listen to Part 2.

In this episode of Manufacturing Success, we look into some of the issues concerning wage and hour compliance in the manufacturing industry. It is not a secret that manufacturers are racing to hire as many employees as possible to replace an entire generation of workers who are reaching retirement age. However, recruitment is not the only difficulty manufacturers face; manufacturers are challenged with managing wage and hour compliance amidst a fast-paced environment. From preventing unauthorized overtime and off-the-clock work to automatic meal deductions, employers in manufacturing are constantly having to conduct quality control audits on their own pay practices. Listen to how Fisher Phillips attorneys address those wage and hour challenges employers in manufacturing uniquely face.

Business leaders in the manufacturing industry must continually assess the efficiency of their organizations' operations. A significant piece of the math that helps to measure efficiency comes down to geography. Where are your operations based? How accessible is it to your supplier partners? What about proximity to rail and other modes of transportation? Does it feature an appealing structure for tax incentives? Can you draw on a healthy supply of high-quality workers? These are just a few of the critically important questions that manufacturing employers should consider when exploring the issue of site selection. Choosing the right location to conduct your business can spell the difference between success and failure; is your business team asking the right questions? In this episode of Manufacturing Success, host Mike Carrouth is joined by Ray Perez, Of Counsel in the Columbus office of Fisher Phillips and co-chair of the Site Selection and Incentives Practice Group for a conversation around the business of site selection. No two states, cities, or even towns are exactly the same, so being careful and strategic as to where you base operations can have a massive impact on your bottom line. Measure twice, and cut once because you may not get a chance to try again.

The NLRB remains in the midst of an extremely active year, defined in no small part by the drive to roll back certain pro-employer initiatives implemented by the Trump Administration. A swinging pendulum of priorities from one administration to the next is pro forma for the NLRB. But the 2023 swing projects to be more pronounced than many other years. In this episode of Manufacturing Success, host Mike Carrouth is joined by Steve Bernstein, co-chair of Fisher Phillips' Labor Relations Practice Group, for another look at the NLRB and it's packed agenda of priorities. Specifically, the efforts being taken to eliminate or restrict the ability of employers to meet with employees during union organizing drives and lawfully share facts that allow for an informed decision on unionization. These so-called “captive audience” meetings, which are routinely conducted to educate employees, and have been a staple in the American workplace since Congress amended labor laws to recognize employer free-speech rights 75 years ago, seem poised for an abrupt ending this year.

2023 is shaping up to be one of the more active years at the NLRB in recent memory. The Biden Board has already started rolling back a number of pro-employer initiatives implemented during the Trump Administration, but the most significant efforts to support organized labor have yet to unfold. In this two-part episode of Manufacturing Success, host Mike Carrouth is joined by Steve Mitchell, co-chair of Fisher Phillips' Manufacturing Industry Group to preview the anticipated return of the Joy Silk Doctrine and the impact resurrecting of this old doctrine could have on employee relations for employers all across our country. Dragging the Joy Silk Doctrine back from the dead seems to be the main strategy to eliminate the secret-ballot voting process currently used by the NLRB. Don't be alarmed if the name Joy Silk does not ring any bells; it references a Board decision from 1949, and was phased out more than 50 years ago. Click here to listen to Part 1 of the podcast.

2023 is shaping up to be one of the more active years at the NLRB in recent memory. The Biden Board has already started rolling back a number of pro-employer initiatives implemented during the Trump Administration, but the most significant efforts to support organized labor have yet to unfold. In this two-part episode of Manufacturing Success, host Mike Carrouth is joined by Steve Mitchell, co-chair of Fisher Phillips' Manufacturing Industry Group to preview the anticipated return of the Joy Silk Doctrine and the impact resurrecting of this old doctrine could have on employee relations for employers all across our country. Dragging the Joy Silk Doctrine back from the dead seems to be the main strategy to eliminate the secret-ballot voting process currently used by the NLRB. Don't be alarmed if the name Joy Silk does not ring any bells; it references a Board decision from 1949, and was phased out more than 50 years ago.

On January 5th 2023, the FTC took historic action ostensibly aimed at stamping out the “unfair” use of non-complete clauses in employment contracts. The proposed rule is broad and sweeping, with thousands of employers and millions of employees set to be impacted if it takes effect. For now, the FTC's efforts can be characterized as “throwing the baby out with the bath water.” But there is a long way to go, and a lot to consider before allowing panic to set it. In this episode of Manufacturing Success, host Mike Carrouth talks with Michael Elkon, co-chair of Fisher Phillips Employee Defection and Trade Secrets practice group, about the proposed rule; how we got here, what happens next, and practical suggestions employers may want to consider while the FTC's proposed seismic change to business practices moves forward. For more information on the FTC's proposed rule change, please reference Fisher Phillips' recently published Insights on the issue: FTC Proposes the End of Employment-Based Non-Compete Agreements Frequently Asked Questions About the FTC's Proposal to Ban Non-Compete Agreements

In the first episode of “Manufacturing Success,” host Mike Carrouth is joined by David Walton for a high-level discussion around the increasingly important topic of people analytics and how its associated principles relate to human resources in the workplace. Big data, analytics, artificial intelligence and human resource functions come together at a workplace crossroads that can have a big impact on how manufacturers approach employee relations. Approximately 80% of human resource departments – including those of manufacturers - currently utilize some form of these people analytics in connection with recruiting, hiring, performance management, compensation, training and other practices. But the laws regulating their use are murky at best, and non-existent at worst. So how can (and should) manufacturers come to understand and take advantage of these powerful technologies, without running afoul of the law? Start by joining Mike and David for this interactive and forward-thinking discussion, designed to provide a baseline education in this evolving area of technology and law.

More than a half-year has passed since the Supreme Court ruled in Van Buren v. United States that one "exceeds authorized access" by accessing off-limit files and other information on a computer system they were otherwise authorized to access, effectively narrowing the applicability of the CFAA in prosecuting cybersecurity and computer crime. At that time, Brent Cossrow and Dave Walton shared rapid reactions and perspectives in Part I of this broadcast. Soon afterwards, they reviewed the first wave of cases that discussed Van Buren in Part II. And in this episode, they are back to analyze a fresh slate of cases that were directly informed by this new “gates up or down” era for employers seeking to protect workplace computers and electronically stored information.

In this episode, Brent Cossrow and Dave Walton are joined by Risa Boerner, Chair of the Data Security and Workplace Privacy Practice Group at Fisher Phillips, for a discussion around employee privacy through the lens of Stengart v. Loving Care Agency, Inc., 990 A.2d 650 (2010). Though more than 10 year old, the New Jersey Supreme Court's decision in Stengart continues to manifest itself on a very regular basis. To what extent may employees expect privacy and confidentiality in personal e-mails composed on company-owned computers? According to the New Jersey Supreme Court, there should be a "reasonable" expectation of privacy in personal e-mails on company computers, and that attorney–client communication privileges and privacy should not be violated. But technology and the work environment have evolved considerably in the past 11 years. Join Brent, Dave and Risa as they unpack certain of the interpretations and applications the passage of time allows for, and how employers should respond.

In this episode, Brent Cossrow and Dave Walton wrap up their discussion around the intersection of data analytics and the workplace. Having reviewed the basics of big data in practical terms (Part I) and how powerful algorithms designed for use in theaters of war are making their way into HR departments across the country (Part II), Brent and Dave dig a little deeper into use-cases for this technology and the accompanying risks that organizations take on by leveraging these new tools. Questions of discrimination present themselves in new ways that organizations and their counsel must be cognizant of to avoid legal trouble.

In this episode, Brent Cossrow and Dave Walton continue their discussion around the intersection of data analytics and the workplace. Powerful algorithms designed for use in theaters of war have made their way into HR departments across the country, helping organizations in connection with training, promotion, recruitment, hiring and more. The technology is strong and its impact on HR functions is clear, but what about the risk? Generally speaking, the law lags behind technology. So while there is no compelling reason not to use the best tools available, certain precautions should be undertaken to protect organizations and individuals against the threat of litigation, down the road. Click here to listen to the first installment of this series:  Big Data, Analytics and the Workplace, Part I

In this episode, Brent Cossrow and Dave Walton review the basics of big data in practical terms. What are analytics and why is discussion of their value so pervasive? How, when and why does the use analytics move from the realm of data scientists to the desks of human resource professionals and in-house counsel? Like so many aspects of employment law, the answers are both complicated and evolving. In this instance, at the speed of technology. Before end-users can reasonably be expected to interpret and apply predictive analytics, they must first develop a foundation of understanding for what they are looking at and where it came from. Part I of “Big Data, Analytics and the Workplace” aims to provide this baseline. Parts II and III will discuss some of the circumstances under which human resource professionals and other employees tasked with managing a workforce can and should be leveraging this fountain of invaluable information, as well as the accompanying legal considerations.

In this episode, Brent Cossrow and Dave Walton continue to unpack the Van Buren v. United States Supreme Court ruling and the new “gates up or down” era of data protection it has unleashed. Part II focuses on even more recent cases that have discussed the Court's decision in Van Buren, which is less than 60-days old. The ruling in Van Buren stands to impact millions of Americans and their rights with respect to personal devices, employer-owned devices and the data both contain. As litigation progresses around the country, expect to see more rulings to lean on the Van Buren decision. And keep listening to better understand how, as employers, you should interpret and respond to the changing landscape of data protection. Click here to listen to the first installment of this episode:  The Post-Van Buren Workplace and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, Part I

In June 2021, the Supreme Court ruled in Van Buren v. United States that one "exceeds authorized access" by accessing off-limit files and other information on a computer system they were otherwise authorized to access, effectively narrowing the applicability of the CFAA in prosecuting cybersecurity and computer crime. The ruling also marks the start of a “gates up or down” era for employers seeking to protect workplace computers and electronically stored information. In this podcast, Brent Cossrow and Dave Walton, partners in the Philadelphia office of Fisher Phillips and its Employee Defection and Trade Secrets practice group, unpack this new era of data protection and its far-reaching implications for employers.

On Friday July 9, 2021, President Biden signed a much-anticipated Executive Order on Promoting Competition in the American Economy. The Order is ambitious in spirit, but its true impact on employers seems to depend on exactly how the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) interprets and applies its mandate. In this podcast, Brent Cossrow and Dave Walton, partners in the Philadelphia office of Fisher Phillips and its Employee Defection and Trade Secrets practice group, sit down to discuss their initial reactions, including questions of how the FTC projects to respond, whether the Order creates a private right of action, and how the Order might eventually be used in civil litigation.

How to roll out an updated and compliant mask policy is on every employer's mind right now, especially as vaccination status plays such a key role in your decisions. This podcast, with co-leader of the Firm's Vaccine Subcommittee, Kevin Troutman, will discuss best practices from distinguishing vaccinated employees and non-vaccinated employees, the ADA and EEOC considerations, and how firm clients are managing this new workplace hurdle.

In this podcast, Fisher Phillips partner and co-leader of the Firm's Vaccine Subcommittee, Kevin Troutman, returns to chat with Travis Vance about the ins and outs of the new CDC mask guidance for vaccinated workers and how employers can navigate this very fluid field. The discussion touches on updated OSHA considerations that remain paramount during this turbulent time.

The success of your organization depends on effective management of remote workers. Are your remote workers visible, or invisible? Is the connection between the management of your organization and the invisible workforce best characterized as “remote,” in the sense that management does not know whether the workers are productive? Or are hurting? Or are organizing a union? Or are planning to leave? If these questions are on your mind, join us for this 15-minute podcast.

This legal alert was published on January 22nd, 2021 by Micah Dickie in Atlanta. President Joe Biden has signed several Executive Orders in the first two days of his presidency, and one is an Executive Order on Protecting Worker Health and Safety that directs the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to increase enforcement of existing agency standards and investigate whether a new standard for COVID-19 mitigation is needed. Given that President Biden has nominated Boston Mayor Marty Walsh to be the next Secretary of Labor – the first union member to fill this role in nearly 50 years and soon to be in charge of the agency that oversees OSHA – employers should be aware of the key provisions of this executive order ahead of an increase in inspections. Here is what employers need to know.

This legal alert was published on January 7th, 2021 by Randall Coffey in Kansas City, Benjamin Ebbink in Sacramento, Richard Meneghello in Portland, and John Polson in Irvine. The Labor Department finalized a new rule today that aims to make it easier for businesses to classify workers as independent contractors – but the rule faces a very uncertain future given that the Biden administration will take the reins of the federal government before it is scheduled to take effect and the incoming administration has signaled its opposition to this change. Businesses that use independent contractors to carry out critical work roles – especially gig economy companies and those using gig-economy-like strategies for components of their workforce – have long awaited this rule in the hopes that it would lend certainty to modern business models and reduce litigation brought by workers claiming to be misclassified as employees. But celebrations need to be put on hold for now, as we expect President-elect Biden to at least temporarily stall implementation past its planned March 8 effective date while worker advocacy groups and state attorneys general line up to file legal challenges in the hopes of permanently killing the rule.

In this podcast, Fisher Phillips partner Kevin Troutman returns to chat with Travis Vance about employee incentive programs related to the COVID-19 vaccine. The co-leader of our firm’s Vaccine Subcommittee spends some time discussing employee wellness program and what employers can and cannot do to provide incentives for employees to get the COVID-19 vaccine.

The vast majority of employers are not considering mandating their employees receive the COVID-19 vaccine, instead choosing to encourage the shot – but a significant number of businesses remain confused and uncertain on whether and how to incentivize their workers to get inoculated. That’s according to a recent survey conducted by Fisher Phillips, with 700 respondents providing their thoughts between January 26-29. Fisher Phillips partner Kevin Troutman provides a quick review of these survey results and also sheds light on the thinking of other businesses when it comes to this specific challenge.

Conversations about COVID-19 with Fisher PhillipsModerator: Travis VanceJoin Travis Vance, co-chair of the firm’s Workplace Safety and Catastrophe Management Practice Group and a leader of the firm’s COVID-19 Task Force, as he connects with thought leaders from around the firm to discuss timely issues related to the pandemic’s impact on the workplace. In this podcast, Fisher Phillips partners Phil Bauknight and Kevin Troutman return to chat with Travis Vance about potential employer liabilities related to workplace COVID-19 vaccination programs. The two leaders of our firm’s Vaccine Subcommittee spend some time discussing whether waivers are an effective tool for employers and other best practices related to these thorny issues.

Conversations about COVID-19 with Fisher PhillipsModerator: Travis VanceJoin Travis Vance, co-chair of the firm’s Workplace Safety and Catastrophe Management Practice Group and a leader of the firm’s COVID-19 Task Force, as he connects with thought leaders from around the firm to discuss timely issues related to the pandemic’s impact on the workplace. It’s the topic every employer across the country wants to know about: COVID-19 vaccines and the workplace. In this podcast, Fisher Phillips partners Phil Bauknight and Kevin Troutman – who have been leading our firm’s Vaccine Subcommittee – discuss key issues that employers should consider surrounding the COVID-19 vaccination effort. Among their topics: whether and how to implement a mandatory vaccination program, dealing with reasonable accommodations, alternatives to a mandatory vaccine requirement, and other common questions.

Conversations about COVID-19 with Fisher PhillipsModerator: Travis VanceJoin Travis Vance, co-chair of the firm’s Workplace Safety and Catastrophe Management Practice Group and a leader of the firm’s COVID-19 Task Force, as he connects with thought leaders from around the firm to discuss timely issues related to the pandemic’s impact on the workplace. It’s often said that doing business in California is like doing business in an entirely different country, and the state’s response to the pandemic is no exception to this rule. In this podcast, California attorneys Ben Ebbink and Hannah Sweiss discuss the most pressing issues they have seen from clients and California employers related to COVID-19. They will discuss questions about international travel, employers’ new obligations, and recent legislation affecting California employers from a federal, state, and local level.

Conversations about COVID-19 with Fisher PhillipsModerator: Travis VanceJoin Travis Vance, co-chair of the firm’s Workplace Safety and Catastrophe Management Practice Group and a leader of the firm’s COVID-19 Task Force, as he connects with thought leaders from around the firm to discuss timely issues related to the pandemic’s impact on the workplace. In this podcast, California attorneys Ben Ebbink and Hannah Sweiss discuss COVID-19 issues in the California workplace, specifically the details of a dramatic new state statute (AB865) that imposes incredible new notification requirements – among other things – on California employers. The new law, in effect as of January 1, 2021, completely redefines what an employer must do when there is a COVID-19 case in a California workplace. It is a must-listen for any organization with a presence in California.

This legal alert was published on December 3, 2020 by Benjamin Morrell and Travis Vance in Charlotte.The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention just issued new guidance stating that coronavirus quarantines may be shortened to seven or 10 days under certain circumstances, down from the 14 days currently recommended, according to media reports. This will permit businesses to return employees who have been exposed to COVID-19 back to work on a reduced timeframe. What do employers need to know about this encouraging development?

This newsletter article was published on December 29th, 2020 by Emily Litzinger in Louisville.Undoubtedly, working mothers have always worked a “double shift” – a full day at work followed by hours spent caring for their children, running to soccer practice, and getting food on the table. Before the pandemic, however, working mothers at least had a network of support including childcare and school to make this challenge possible. But once COVID-19 hit, childcare became scarce, virtual school continued indefinitely, and the months blurred together. The pressure mounted to such unrealistic levels that working mothers began to leave the workforce at a shocking rate. This article will take a closer look on the unique problems faced by working mothers during the pandemic, and will offer six tangible solutions that employers can put into place to support these valuable team members at their workplaces.

This legal alert was published on November 17th, 2020 by J. Randall Coffey in Kansas City, and Richard Meneghello in Portland. The federal agency charged with enforcing the nation’s main workplace discrimination laws just announced that it recovered over $535 million from employers on behalf of aggrieved workers and applicants this past fiscal year, a figure that shattered the previous record and set an all-time high. The EEOC’s November 16 financial report also touted successes in clearing old inventory of charges, increasing the percentage of resolutions achieved in favor of charging parties, and mediating thousands of charges to conclusion. The report further indicated that the EEOC filed the second-lowest number of merits lawsuits against employers in over two decades. What are the top five takeaways for employers from this latest report?

This newsletter article was published on November 30th, 2020 by Kristin White in Denver.When the pandemic first began, most employees were ready to pitch in and do their part to help reduce the spread of COVID-19. They adapted to remote working while attending to their children. Others understood they were deemed “essential workers” and adjusted to the new normal when coming to work, which included temperature checks, symptom sign-offs, masks, and social distancing. But after months of being team players, we are all ready for the game to end. Many of your employees are feeling “COVID fatigue” just as we see COVID-19 exposure numbers increasing once again. Here are our top five suggestions for ways to keep your employees masked and socially distanced as we play through these final and extra innings.

This newsletter article was published on October 30th, 2020 by Ashby Angell, Chantell Foley, and Todd Logsdon in Louisville.When thinking about safety training for your workforce, you may be, understandably, focused on your workforce as a whole. Just as important, however, is considering the age, gender, nationality, and other aspects of all of your employees in planning for such training. America’s workforce is more diverse than ever, and this diversity can impact the way employees comprehend and implement their training. The last census revealed that approximately 17% of the U.S. workforce is currently made up of foreign-born workers, and the Bureau of Labor Statistics projects that minorities, including foreign-born workers, will approach 50% of the American workforce by the year 2050. The BLS also reported in 2016 that women comprised 47% of the total workforce, and younger workers (those ages 15-24) represented 14% of the workforce. As America's workforce continues to evolve, so will yours – and your safety training should evolve in turn.

This legal alert was published on October 22, 2020 by Nicholas Hulse and Travis Vance in Charlotte.New COVID-19 contact tracing procedures released by the federal government yesterday have expanded the category of individuals who are deemed to be in close contact with each other – and will complicate the already difficult task faced by employers when trying to maintain a safe workplace environment. The updated guidance now indicates that workers should be considered to be at risk of contracting the novel coronavirus if they were within six feet of an infected individual for a total of 15 minutes or more over a 24-hour period during the 48 hours before the infected individual exhibited symptoms or, if asymptomatic, 48 hours before the COVID-19 test was administered, even if the interactions that lead to a cumulative total of 15 minutes were brief and spread out over that time. What do employers need to know about this new standard, and more importantly what do you need to change about your workplace practices?

This newsletter article was published on September 4, 2020 by Megan Janes in Fort Lauderdale and Jennifer Sandberg in Atlanta.What a year! 2020 has been full of challenges, both personal and professional. Personally, each of us have our own story. Professionally, workplaces have been rocked with unprecedented turmoil as we navigate COVID-19 and the lasting impact of the social justice protest movement. And now, we will close out 2020 with a contentious presidential election. A pandemic, racial tensions, concerns about inaccurate news, fears of election fraud, and the potential for high stakes espionage may make workplace issues seem trivial – but just wait until it’s your workplace, regardless of whether you are an employee, manager, or senior leadership. You should anticipate election-related workplace issues regardless of whether your workplace remains virtual, never closed, or falls somewhere in between.As we count down to the election (less than 60 days to go!) and then the inauguration (a little more than four months to go!), we all have some listening to do. Why listen? Because it may turn out that you are wrong. This article will cover some common misconceptions and provide some legal standards to keep in mind. It then offers a 10-point action plan to proactively avoid problems and respond to them if they arise. The article concludes with information about an interactive workshop that may be of value in helping you address specific issues of tension in your workplace.

This legal alert was published on September 16, 2020 by Phillip Bauknight in New Jersey.A recent report from the federal government revealing that workplace safety whistleblower claims have exponentially increased during the pandemic should give all employers pause – and should motivate you to take immediate steps to ensure you don’t find yourself on the receiving end of such a claim. What do you need to know about this dramatic rise and what can you do about it?

This legal alert was published on August 18th 2020 by Kevin Troutman in Houston. As the flu season approaches and the COVID-19 pandemic continues, employers’ mandatory vaccination policies may soon become more important than ever. For several reasons, those policies will also attract unprecedented scrutiny. First, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) has stated that getting the flu vaccine this fall will be all the more important, both to reduce health risks for individuals and to conserve the country’s potentially scarce healthcare resources, particularly for respiratory conditions like the flu and COVID-19. Second, one or more COVID-19 vaccines are expected to become available later this year or in early 2021, offering possible protection from this worldwide scourge. Third, mandatory vaccination policies sometimes spark deeply personal responses at a time when political differences and social justice issues remain at the forefront of the nation’s consciousness.   As employers seek to balance their duty to maintain a workplace free of recognized dangers and the rights of individual employees, questions abound: Can you enforce mandatory vaccination policies? (In most cases, the answer is “yes,” as discussed below.) If you mandate flu shots or COVID-19 vaccinations, what specific risks and responsibilities must you consider and address? And finally, is a mandatory vaccination policy the right option for your company? As usual, the answers to these critical questions lie in the details. This article will provide you an outline of issues to consider as you answer these questions, along with some recommended best practices guidance to lead you through these unprecedented times.

This legal alert was published on August 17th, 2020 by Travis W. Vance in Charlotte. Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has issued constantly changing guidance for employers that many view as complex, confusing, and impractical. In its perplexing web of guidelines, the CDC recommends that your company take several actions to protect workers from contracting COVID-19, like self-isolating sick employees, quarantining exposed employees, screening employees for symptoms prior to work, and installing partitions to protect public-facing employees.Given their complexity, some of these directives are often not fully understood by companies. Further complicating matters, many of the recommendations have never been previously undertaken by employers, leading to misapplication. Worst of all, other guidelines are simply not feasible for some employers, leaving them with the tough decision of not following the CDC directive in order to stay in business.Unfortunately, ignoring or misunderstanding these confusing guidelines, like the four commonly misinterpreted guidance listed below, could lead to legal risks for your company.  

This legal alert was published on July 7, 2020 by Hannah Sweiss (Woodland Hills, Los Angeles). Though many experts thought the summer months would bring reprieve, COVID-19 cases are continuing to rise in the United States and, as a result, more employers are dealing with employees testing positive for the coronavirus. Since we published our original plan for responding COVID-19 cases when businesses began to reopen in April, updated guidance has provided some additional considerations employers should keep in mind as they address a positive coronavirus case. Here is our quick seven-step guide to addressing a positive COVID-19 case in the workplace.

This legal alert was published on July 16, 2020 by:Myra Creighton (Atlanta)Aymara Ledezma (Los Angelas)Todd Logsdon (Louiville)Richard Meneghello (Portland)Catharine Morisset (Seattle)Andria Ryan (Atlanta)As an increasing number of businesses begin to require face coverings in their facilities – whether as a result of a local legal mandate or in the interest of public safety – there has been a corresponding increase in the number of well-publicized reports of customers and guests reacting in a belligerent, hostile, or even violent manner after being asked to comply with mask rules. What should your business do to minimize the chances of such an incident occurring in your workplace, and what should you do if an anti-mask guest disrupts your business? Here is a five-step plan to address this unfortunate part of our new reality.

This legal alert was published on June 18, 2020 by Jessica T. Cook, Shanon R. Stevenson, and Cynthia J. Yarbrough in Atlanta. By a 5-4 vote, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on June 18th, the Trump administration did not provide adequate and appropriate justification to terminate the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, preserving the ability of approximately 700,000 individuals – sometimes known as “Dreamers” – to remain in the country and in American workforces. Considering the June 18th decision, many DACA recipients will be able to apply to continue to extend their employment authorization or pursue additional educational opportunities.

This legal alert was published on June 15th, 2020 by J. Randall Coffey in Kansas City, David Klass in Charlotte, Megan Walker in San Diego, and Sarah Weiseltheir in New York and New Jersey. In a 6-to-3 vote on June 15th, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that workplace discrimination because of an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity — including being transgender — is unlawful discrimination “because of sex” under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The basis for the Court’s ruling in Bostock v. Clayton County was summarized by Justice Gorsuch in his majority opinion: “An individual’s homosexuality or transgender status is not relevant to employment decisions. That’s because it is impossible to discriminate against a person for being homosexual or transgender without discriminating against that individual based on sex.” What do employers need to know about this historic decision?

This legal alert was published on May 26th, 2020 by Travis W. Vance in Charlotte. Perhaps the most challenging aspect of encountering a suspected or confirmed case of COVID-19 among your employees as you reopen your business is identifying those employees who worked near the infected worker – and thus must also be quarantined. Luckily, there is a simple numerical sequence you can remember that will enable you to follow the CDC contact tracing guidelines for general businesses: 6-15-48. You will need infected employees to identify others who worked within 6 feet of them, for 15 minutes or more, within the 48 hours prior to the sick individual showing symptoms, or later.

This legal alert was posted on March 26th 2020 by Matthew R Korn and Sheila M Willis in Columbia. As more and more businesses plan their re-openings heading into the summer months, many employers are trying to determine how to handle employee requests for leave under the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA) based on the unavailability of child care. Specifically, once schools are closed for summer vacation, do employees continue to qualify for paid leave benefits under FFCRA?

This legal alert was posted on May 26th, 2020 by Benjamin J Ross in Denver and Samantha Saltzman in Irvine. With employees returning to work and companies reopening their doors to customers, employers are looking for ways to limit liability related to potential COVID-19 cases contracted in the workplace. To do so, many are considering waivers for not only their employees, but also for customers. Such waivers, however, are somewhat limited in their effectiveness and employers should consider the pros and cons before attempting to implement them. You may also want to consider an alternate strategy that may offer you some of the assurances you seek without many of the negatives associated with waivers.

This legal alert was posted on April 24th, 2020 by Risa B. Boerner (CIPP/US) and Luke E. McDaniels in Philadelphia.The COVID-19 pandemic has caused many employers now operating remotely to conduct meetings via video conference – which has created a whole new set of various privacy and cybersecurity concerns. While these remote work tools have facilitated a more personal connection and interactive experience, their use is fraught with privacy concerns you may never have before considered. If your organization is weighing its options or unaware of the risks these services may create, this article provides a 10-point plan to protect your personal and confidential information and ensure you remain compliant with various federal and state privacy laws.