Podcasts about fair labor standards act

This Day in Legal History: Kennedy Signs the Equal Pay ActOn this day in 1963, President John F. Kennedy signed the Equal Pay Act, the first federal statute aimed directly at sex-based wage discrimination. The law took the form of an amendment to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, which meant that it slid into an existing enforcement framework run by the Wage and Hour Division of the Department of Labor — a deliberate choice that bypassed the need to build new institutional machinery and harnessed thirty years of FLSA caselaw and habits of compliance. The legal hook is the Act's “equal pay for equal work” command: employers may not pay employees of one sex less than employees of the opposite sex for jobs requiring “equal skill, effort, and responsibility, and which are performed under similar working conditions.”Four affirmative defenses are written into the text — a seniority system, a merit system, a system measuring earnings by quantity or quality of production, or “any other factor other than sex” — and that fourth catch-all has done more work in litigation than the other three combined, shaping how courts evaluate market-based, education-based, and prior-salary-based pay differentials decades later. The wage gap at the moment Kennedy signed was about 59 cents on the dollar; six decades on, by the Bureau of Labor Statistics's standard measure, it sits closer to 84 cents. That tells you something about how a clean, structurally well-designed statute can still leave a lot of the work undone, because the gap is and always was about more than identical pairs of jobs at the same employer.The Equal Pay Act is not the whole story of American workplace-equality law; Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, and a long line of state-law analogues do much of the modern enforcement work. But June 10, 1963 is the day Congress, with the President's signature, said for the first time that paying a woman less than a man for the same work was unlawful, full stop. Everything that has followed in this corner of the law has been built on top of that sentence.The Federal Circuit on Monday affirmed a Delaware district court judgment invalidating four Purdue Pharma patents covering an abuse-deterrent, low-toxicity version of the opioid OxyContin, in a decision the patent bar has been waiting on for months. The case is Purdue Pharma L.P. v. Epic Pharma LLC. The patents covered Purdue's reformulation of OxyContin to make the pills crush-resistant and to reduce a manufacturing impurity, and the asserted innovation grew, the company said, out of its discovery of the source of a particular toxic impurity that had previously eluded chemists at competing labs. Purdue's argument on appeal was, in essence, that the discovery of the impurity's source was itself nonobvious, and that the resulting patents inherited that nonobviousness. The Federal Circuit said no.The panel held that the relevant obviousness inquiry asks whether the claimed reformulation — not the discovery that motivated it — would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention, and that once the prior art is taken into account, the answer is yes. The practical consequence of the ruling is large. It opens the door wider for generic abuse-deterrent OxyContin alternatives and clarifies a doctrinal point pharmaceutical companies have been pressing on for years: a hard-won research insight does not, on its own, automatically save a patent from obviousness if the resulting product was within the prior art's reach. Purdue's options now are a rehearing petition at the Federal Circuit, a cert petition at the Supreme Court (which the company has already pursued in a related case last spring), or quiet acceptance. Expect a cert petition. Expect the cert petition to be denied. Watch the generic-drug filings that follow.Fed. Circ. Panel Backs Invalidation Of OxyContin PatentThe plaintiffs in the Eastern District of Virginia lawsuit over the Trump administration's $1.8 billion “Anti-Weaponization Fund” — a story we covered earlier htis week— went back to Judge Leonie Brinkema on Tuesday and asked for permission to conduct limited discovery into whether the Justice Department's recent representation that it would stop work on the fund is a real commitment or a litigation convenience.The plaintiffs' problem is straightforward: acting Attorney General Todd Blanche has filed papers saying the program is “not going forward,” but President Trump publicly described the fund last week as a “great idea” that many Republicans support, and the executive order that created the fund has not been formally rescinded. From a litigation-strategy standpoint, the plaintiffs do not want to walk away from a live case on the strength of a DOJ filing, accept dismissal as moot, and then find out three months later that the fund has been quietly resurrected under a different name.Judge Brinkema has a hearing scheduled for Friday, June 12, on whether to extend the temporary restraining order into a preliminary injunction. The Tuesday filing teed up the broader mootness fight that will dominate Friday's hearing: when does a federal agency's promise to stop doing something actually deprive a court of jurisdiction to enjoin the underlying program, and what discovery, if any, is a plaintiff entitled to before that determination is made. The doctrine here — voluntary cessation, capable of repetition yet evading review, and the heavy burden the Supreme Court has placed on the party claiming mootness — favors the plaintiffs procedurally. Whether Brinkema agrees on Friday is the question to watch.‘Anti-weaponization' fund challengers question its demise – Roll CallSCOTUSblog's John Elwood walked through a useful relist roundup on Tuesday, and the four cases sitting in the relist pile are worth flagging because each of them touches a different load-bearing wall in federal practice. The first is a prolonged-detention challenge to immigration custody under Section 1226(c). The ACLU is asking the Court to clarify that very long mandatory-detention periods trigger procedural due process review under the Mathews v. Eldridge balancing test, picking up on the Second Circuit's willingness to do so. The second is Newberry v. Texas, a case where Texas itself has confessed error — a rare procedural posture in which the State agrees the defendant should win — and the question is what the Court does when the parties on both sides ask for the same remedy. The third is Kian v. Florida, a Sixth Amendment challenge to the use of six-person juries in serious felony cases, on the theory that the historical understanding of “jury” in the founding era assumed twelve and that the Court's mid-twentieth-century cases approving six-person juries were wrong on the originalist analysis. The fourth is Maxwell v. Thomas, a federal habeas case asking whether the First Step Act‘s halfway-house and home-confinement provisions are properly enforceable through 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas petitions, an issue with a real circuit split. None of these have been granted yet — they are relists, which means at least one Justice is interested but the Court has not yet decided whether to hear them — but the mix is the part to watch: it tells you what the Justices are circling without committing to. Expect at least one of these to be granted before the term ends.A random assortment of relists: prolonged detention, confessions of error, small juries, and new rules on habeas | SCOTUSblog This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Are your salaried employees actually classified correctly under federal law — or are you sitting on overtime liability without knowing it? Most small business owners don't realize there's a three-part exemption test under the Fair Labor Standards Act that every salaried role has to pass. In Episode 5 of the 13 HR Foundations series, Kerri Roberts walks through classification, pay equity, and how to build a compensation structure that holds up in an audit. In this episode, you'll learn: 1. The three-part FLSA exemption test every salaried employee has to pass (and why "salaried" alone doesn't make someone exempt) 2. The four most common classification mistakes Kerri sees in HR audits — and how to spot them in your own business 3. Why pay equity is NOT the same conversation as DEI, and what the Equal Pay Act and Title VII actually require 4. How to build a real compensation structure with three components: benchmark, range, and philosophy 5. The three audit questions to ask about every employee on your team this week CHAPTERS: 00:00 Why I've never seen a company get this right 02:24 Where you are in the 13 HR Foundations series 04:46 Most owners don't realize they have classifications 06:55 The 3-part FLSA exemption test 09:15 Common classification mistakes I see in audits 12:36 What pay equity actually is (and isn't) 17:18 Equal Pay Act, Title VII, and pattern risk 21:54 Building a comp structure: benchmark, range, philosophy 25:21 The arbitrary raise problem 27:43 What to say when an employee asks for more money 32:26 3 audit questions for every employee on your team 34:50 How to get help Not sure where your classification or comp gaps are? Take the free HR Audit and see exactly where you stand in 5 minutes: saltandlightadvisors.com/hraudit ——— Resources to keep building: 

This Day in Legal History: Sirhan Sirhan SentencedOn April 23, 1969, Sirhan Sirhan was formally sentenced to death for the assassination of Robert F. Kennedy, a crime that had shaken the United States the previous year. The sentencing came after a highly publicized trial in Los Angeles, where prosecutors argued that the killing was deliberate and politically motivated. Evidence presented at trial included eyewitness accounts placing Sirhan at the scene and actively firing the fatal shots. His own recorded statements, which expressed hostility toward Kennedy, played a key role in establishing intent. The defense raised questions about Sirhan's mental state, but these arguments did not overcome the prosecution's narrative of premeditation.The jury ultimately found him guilty of first-degree murder, leading to the imposition of the death penalty under California law at the time. The sentence reflected both the gravity of the crime and the broader national trauma surrounding political assassinations in the 1960s. However, the legal status of capital punishment in California soon shifted dramatically. In 1972, the California Supreme Court decided People v. Anderson, which held that the death penalty as then applied violated the state constitution. As a result, Sirhan's sentence was commuted to life imprisonment, aligning his case with others affected by the ruling.The Sirhan case remains significant in legal history for its intersection with issues of political violence and criminal accountability. It also illustrates how broader constitutional developments can reshape individual sentences long after a trial concludes. Debates about his culpability and mental state have persisted, raising ongoing questions about the standards for criminal responsibility. At the same time, the case is frequently cited in discussions about the fairness and consistency of the death penalty. It stands as a reminder of how legal systems respond to acts that carry both criminal and profound national consequences.Anthropic has asked a federal court in California to rule in its favor in a copyright lawsuit brought by major music publishers, including Universal Music Group, over the use of song lyrics to train its AI chatbot, Claude. The company argues that its use of copyrighted lyrics qualifies as “fair use” because it is transformative, meaning the material was used to help the AI understand language rather than to reproduce songs. Anthropic claims this kind of use supports innovation across fields like science, business, and education.The publishers, including Concord and ABKCO, disagree and argue that the AI system can generate outputs that resemble or compete with their lyrics, potentially harming the market for original works. They originally filed the lawsuit in 2023, alleging that Anthropic copied lyrics from hundreds of songs by well-known artists without permission. This dispute is part of a broader wave of legal challenges against AI companies, including OpenAI, Microsoft, and Meta Platforms, over how training data is used.Anthropic is seeking summary judgment, which would allow it to win the case without a full trial if the judge agrees that its actions were legally protected fair use. The outcome could be highly influential, as courts are currently split on whether AI training on copyrighted material is permissible. The company also emphasizes that copyright law is intended to benefit the public by encouraging innovation, not just to compensate creators.At the center of the case is a key legal question: whether copying large amounts of copyrighted material to train AI systems can be considered transformative use under copyright law. This issue is likely to shape future rulings as similar cases continue to move through the courts.Anthropic seeks pivotal court win in music publisher lawsuit over AI training | ReutersThe U.S. Department of Labor has introduced a proposed rule to clarify when multiple employers can be held jointly responsible for wage and hour violations. The rule, titled Joint Employer Status Under the Fair Labor Standards Act, Family and Medical Leave Act, and Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act, is designed to create a clearer and more consistent standard across federal law. Officials say the goal is to resolve conflicting interpretations among federal courts and make compliance easier for businesses.According to acting Labor Secretary Keith Sonderling, the proposal aims to both simplify regulations for employers and strengthen protections for workers. The rule would mark the agency's first formal guidance on joint employment since the prior regulation from an earlier administration was rescinded without replacement. Unlike that earlier version, the new proposal would apply to multiple statutes, including the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Family and Medical Leave Act.The Department believes a uniform standard will reduce confusion, encourage better business practices, and ensure workers can recover wages or benefits even if one employer fails to pay. Wage and Hour Division Administrator Andrew Rogers emphasized that clearer rules can improve enforcement and reduce litigation.The proposal is currently open for public comment through June 22 and follows earlier signals that the agency planned to revisit joint employer standards.BREAKING: DOL Unveils Joint Employer Rule Proposal - Law360The U.S. Supreme Court signaled that it may side with the Federal Communications Commission in a dispute over how the agency issues fines to wireless carriers. The case involves major companies like Verizon Communications and AT&T, which argued that the FCC's internal enforcement process violates their constitutional right to a jury trial. The fines stem from findings that the companies failed to properly protect customer location data, resulting in penalties totaling over $100 million.During oral arguments, several justices expressed doubt about the companies' claims, suggesting that the FCC's forfeiture orders are not final or binding unless enforced in court. This distinction appeared central, as it implies companies still have the option to challenge the penalties before a judge and jury. Justices, including Amy Coney Barrett and Ketanji Brown Jackson, compared the process to a legal choice—either accept the penalty or contest it through litigation.Some members of the Court, however, raised concerns about whether companies may feel pressured to comply due to uncertainty or reputational harm. John Roberts suggested the issue might be more about public perception than a direct legal burden, while Brett Kavanaugh questioned whether the FCC had been fully clear about the non-binding nature of its orders.The dispute comes amid broader scrutiny of federal agency power, especially following a 2024 decision limiting enforcement proceedings at the Securities and Exchange Commission. Despite that precedent, the justices did not appear ready to apply the same reasoning to the FCC's system. Lower courts had previously split on the issue, prompting Supreme Court review.A final decision is expected by late June and could clarify how far federal agencies can go in using internal processes to impose financial penalties.US Supreme Court leans toward FCC in clash with wireless carriers over fines | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Imagine a blueprint unfolding in Washington, one executive order at a time. Project 2025, crafted by the Heritage Foundation as detailed in its 900-page Mandate for Leadership, aimed to reshape America's federal government by consolidating executive power and advancing conservative priorities. According to the Center for Progressive Reform's February 2026 update, the Trump administration has now initiated or completed 53 percent of its domestic agenda—283 out of 532 recommended actions across 20 agencies.Key proposals targeted dismantling the administrative state. The plan calls for eliminating the Department of Education to boost school choice and parental control, as outlined in Heritage's document. It urges abolishing Head Start, serving over 833,000 low-income children, and ending the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program while phasing out income-driven repayment plans. Labor reforms strike hard: ending card-check union elections, repealing Davis-Bacon wage rules, and allowing waivers from federal labor laws like the Fair Labor Standards Act, per the WFSE Project 2025 summary.Immigration overhaul looms large, advocating mass deportations, ending birthright citizenship, and using military for border arrests—echoed by appointees like Stephen Miller, a Project 2025 contributor now deputy chief of staff, according to the ACLU. Health policies propose repealing the $35 insulin cap and restricting abortion access nationwide, with Reproductive Freedom for All tracking 51 percent implementation, including actions by advisors from groups like Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America.Stated goals, per Heritage, include restoring the family, defending sovereignty, and dismantling bureaucracy. Yet experts warn of deeper impacts: Brookings notes rollbacks on civil rights for LGBTQ+ students and reduced funding for disabled pupils; the NAACP Legal Defense Fund highlights threats to equal employment and expanded death penalties.These threads weave a vast ambition—from privatizing Medicare via vouchers to slashing SNAP food aid—testing governance's resilience, as LULAC observes in state pilots like Texas.Looking ahead, with three years left, midterm elections and court challenges loom as pivotal decision points. Thank you for tuning in, listeners—come back next week for more.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.aiThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI

Jeremy Smith, partner with Dinsmore, joins Pandy to discuss the new proposal for determining independent contractors from W2 employees. Jeremy shares the importance of independent contractor agreements and the pitfalls of making the wrong classification of workers under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

In this installment of our Payroll Brass Tax podcast series, Mike Mahoney (Morristown/New York) and Stephen Kenney (Dallas) explore the payroll and employment tax implications of on-demand pay, also known as earned wage access (EWA), and how real-time payment systems like the Federal Reserve's FedNow service are accelerating its adoption. Stephen and Mike, who is the chair of the firm's Employment Tax Group, cover the IRS's constructive receipt doctrine, FICA timing, Fair Labor Standards Act considerations, emerging state licensing regimes in Nevada and Missouri, and Treasury's proposed legislative fixes in the 2025 Green Book.

Comment on the Show by Sending Mark a Text Message.Think salary means no overtime? That belief costs workers thousands every year. We take you through a fast, practical audit to see if your “exempt” status holds up under the Fair Labor Standards Act—and where employers often get it wrong. From the 2025 salary threshold to the duties test that trips up inflated job titles, we translate legal standards into plain language so you can protect your time and pay.First, we dismantle the salary myth and explain the three-part legal framework: salary basis, salary level, and duties. You'll hear why pay docking can defeat exemption, how the updated 58,656-dollar annual threshold reshapes eligibility, and where narrow exceptions apply. Then we unpack real-world traps: the “assistant manager” who manages no one, the administrative role that follows a script instead of exercising independent judgment, and the learned professional label that doesn't apply when the job doesn't require advanced knowledge. Titles don't decide your rights—your actual daily work does.Next, we spotlight the hidden drain of shadow hours. Late-night Slack checks, weekend client emails, and daytime travel are work—and if you're non-exempt, they must be paid. We walk through the math: at a 30-dollar base rate, that's 45-dollar overtime, and just five extra hours a week can approach 12,000 dollars a year. Finally, we share a clear plan: pull your offer letter and job description, verify your pay against the new threshold, keep a two-week shadow log of every minute worked, and compare your real duties to the law. If the numbers and tasks don't match the exemption rules, you can bring your case to HR or file with the Department of Labor to recover up to two or three years of unpaid wages.Subscribe for more straight-talk guidance on workplace rights, share this episode with a coworker who stays late, and leave a review to help others find tools that protect their time and paycheck. If you enjoyed this episode of the Employee Survival Guide please like us on Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn. We would really appreciate if you could leave a review of this podcast on your favorite podcast player such as Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Leaving a review will inform other listeners you found the content on this podcast is important in the area of employment law in the United States. For more information, please contact our employment attorneys at Carey & Associates, P.C. at 203-255-4150, www.capclaw.com.Disclaimer: For educational use only, not intended to be legal advice.

In this episode, JoDee and Susan attempt to demystify the Fair Labor Standards Act. Topics include: What the FLSA is Employment practices the FLSA does NOT regulate Classifying employees as exempt or non-exempt Common errors in calculating overtime Payroll-related records that must be kept Classifying workers as employees vs. independent contractors Child labor rules that are part of the FLSA Penalties for violating the FLSA Suggestions for making sure you stay in compliance In this episode's listener question, we're asked whether it's better to have a bereavement leave policy that offers different amounts of time off depending on the employee's relationship with the deceased or an open policy depending on the situation and the manager's discretion. In the news, The Academy to Innovate HR released a report on 11 HR trends for 2026. Full show notes and links are available here: https://getjoypowered.com/show-notes-episode-239-the-fair-labor-standards-act-flsa/ A transcript of the episode can be found here: https://getjoypowered.com/transcript-episode-239-the-fair-labor-standards-act-flsa/ To get 0.5 hour of SHRM recertification credit, fill out the evaluation here: https://getjoypowered.com/shrm/ (the SHRM credit code for this episode will expire on January 26, 2027) Become a member to get early and ad-free access to episodes, video versions, and more perks! Learn more at patreon.com/joypowered Connect with us: @JoyPowered on Instagram: https://instagram.com/joypowered @JoyPowered on Facebook: https://facebook.com/joypowered @JoyPowered on LinkedIn: https://linkedin.com/company/joypowered Sign up for our email newsletter: https://getjoypowered.com/newsletter/ 

Are you paying your employees for travel between job sites? Learn how the US Supreme Court has reinforced the Department of Labor's interpretation of the Fair Labor Standards Act on travel time.

Navigating wage-and-hour laws can sometimes feel like running a brewery during Oktoberfest—busy, complex, and full of moving parts. With local, state, and federal rules often foaming over into each other, it's easy for even the most diligent employers to find themselves with a compliance hangover.As your business grows, whether you're just tapping your first keg or you've been pouring for years, wage-and-hour issues can sneak up like an unexpected aftertaste. Compensation structures, pay practices, and employee policies that once seemed straightforward can become muddled, especially when expansion brings new faces and new challenges. What starts as a small spill can quickly turn into a bigger mess, affecting more employees and opening the door to costly claims.This session will highlight five common wage-and-hour mistakes that can leave employers feeling flat and offer practical ways to keep your operations crisp and compliant. We'll cover timekeeping best practices, how to handle bonuses and commissions for hourly staff, the tricky business of classifying employees, managing work hours and breaks, and the use of independent contractors and temporary help.Along the way, we'll share real-life examples and tips for keeping your workforce happy and your business out of hot water—so you can focus on brewing success, not legal headaches.After being exposed to Fair Labor Standards Act cases while clerking for a federal appellate court, A.J. began his legal career with a focus on developing an expertise in wage-and-hour compliance and litigation. That has led A.J. to a practice that spans the laws and courts of the country but centers on California's uniquely challenging compliance and litigation landscape.A.J. takes a creative, pragmatic, and business-first approach to managing the defense of complex wage-and-hour class and collective actions, working with clients not only to identify the best path to an efficient and effective resolution but also to adjust problematic practices and policies in a way that accomplishes the client's business goals while mitigating the risk of future claims. As a member of Husch Blackwell's Food Systems industry unit, A.J. regularly advises food and beverage producers on employment law compliance.Stay up to date with CBP: http://update.craftbeerprofessionals.org/

Dr John Fliter, author of U.S. vs. Darby Lumber Co.: The Triumph of Fair Labor Standards (University Press of Kansas, 2025), is our guest today. The interview covers the history of the struggle for fair labor standards in the US, the Fair Labor Standards Act, and the state of labor today. … More Fair Labor Standards in the United States: A Conversation With Constitutional Law Expert John Fliter

Comfort Keepers CEO Natalie Black talked about a range of issues for the podcast. Besides the importance of supporting family caregivers, Black talked about Comfort Keepers becoming a fully franchised home care model last year. She also welcomes legislation in states that regulate home care as it raises the playing field. Meanwhile, the workforce shortage remains the biggest challenge for major personal care franchisor. “Having a reputation as a good employer is just as important as having a reputation as a good provider,” she said. Among the workforce issues Black is paying close attention to is the Department of Labor's proposed companionship exemption rule. If finalized, it would mean certain home care workers would be exempt from federal overtime and minimum wage requirements in the Fair Labor Standards Act. The industry has changed a lot in the last 10 years, Black said. It's fast-paced, there is a lot of competition and there is new technology to incorporate into operations. Going forward, she sees more opportunity for specialization in the vein of the company's new Positive Pathways program, a person-centered approach for caring for clients with Alzheimer's and dementia. In the future, there is the possibility of more specialization around respite services, post-acute care and post-procedural care, she said.Follow us on social media:X: @McKHomeCareFacebook: McKnight's Home CareLinkedIn: McKnight's Home CareInstagram: mcknights_homecareFollow Comfort Keepers on social media:Facebook: Comfort Keepers Home OfficeLinkedIn: Comfort KeepersInstagram: comfortkeepersofficialShow contributors:McKnight's Home Care Editor Liza Berger; Natalie Black, CEO, Comfort Keepers Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

This podcast is powered by Klean Freaks University.com — where real cleaners build real empires. From mop buckets to million-dollar systems, we teach you how to clean smarter, lead stronger, and scale faster.Get the Hire Smarter ™️ The Working Interview System https://klean-freaks-university.newzenler.com/courses/nm0owatgIn this episode of Cleaning Business Life, Shannon Miller and co-host Jamie Runco dig into the stereotypes that have followed cleaners and domestic workers for decades — and how today's cleaning business owners are rewriting the story.From movies like Maid in Manhattan and The Help to sitcom punchlines and mystery novels where “the maid finds the body,” the media has quietly trained the world to see cleaners as less-than. Shannon and Jamie trace how that narrative formed, how the Fair Labor Standards Act finally recognized domestic workers, and why COVID-era “essential worker” status still hasn't translated into the respect cleaners deserve.They also share practical ways to reclaim your professional identity:Why problem clients and non-payers are the exception, not the standardHow pricing, premium rates, and boundaries protect your businessThe power of systems, booking platforms, uniforms, and online presenceRed flags in “high-control” clients and underpaying jobsWhy mentorship, education, and collaboration over competition are game-changersShannon also shares details about the annual Structure Scale & Profit Cleaning Academy scholarship, a $4,500 value including one-on-one coaching, created to give one cleaning business owner a serious leg up in the industry.If you're ready to stop accepting “just the cleaner” vibes and start showing up as the 23rd trade professional you really are, hit play, subscribe, and leave a 5-star review so more cleaners can find this conversation. Here is the link to apply for the scholarshiphttps://forms.gle/c122YU6oNRG7Tic19 Support the showThanks for tuning in to Cleaning Business Life, the show where we pull back the curtain on what it really takes to start, grow, and scale a thriving cleaning business without burning out. Every episode is packed with tips, stories, and strategies you can put to work right away—because you deserve a business that works for you, not the other way around. If you enjoyed today's episode, make sure to follow the podcast so you never miss a new release. And if you got value from this conversation, share it with another cleaning business owner who could use the encouragement and practical advice. Let's stay connected! You can find me online at:

This week, we're covering an uptick in state-level employment law activity, federal court decisions on “captive audience” bans, and Rhode Island's new menopause accommodation requirements. State Legislative Activity Increases California has introduced new laws on paid sick leave, artificial intelligence, pay equity, and protections for tipped workers. Meanwhile, other states are also rolling out new laws impacting employment practices. Courts Clash Over “Captive Audience” Bans Federal courts have issued conflicting rulings on state restrictions regarding employer-mandated meetings related to union organizing. Rhode Island Enacts First-Ever Menopause Law Through a new amendment to its Fair Employment Practices Act, Rhode Island has become the first state in the country to require employers with four or more employees to accommodate menopause symptoms. - Visit our site for this week's Other Highlights and links: https://www.ebglaw.com/eltw409 Download our Wage & Hour Guide for Employers app: https://www.ebglaw.com/wage-hour-guide-for-employers-app. Subscribe to #WorkforceWednesday: https://www.ebglaw.com/eltw-subscribe Visit http://www.EmploymentLawThisWeek.com This podcast is presented by Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. All rights are reserved. This audio recording includes information about legal issues and legal developments. Such materials are for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal developments. These informational materials are not intended, and should not be taken, as legal advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances, and these materials are not a substitute for the advice of competent counsel. The content reflects the personal views and opinions of the participants. No attorney-client relationship has been created by this audio recording. This audio recording may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules. The determination of the need for legal services and the choice of a lawyer are extremely important decisions and should not be based solely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. No representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.

We covered the Fair Labor Standards Act and how it relates to us and our pay.

A former production operator and production technician filed a lawsuit against electric vehicle battery maker BlueOval SK, a joint venture created by Ford and Korean manufacturer SK On. The lead plaintiffs, Sean O'Brien and Randall Moore, allege that the company violated the Fair Labor Standards Act and Kentucky Wage and Hour Laws, Western Kentucky University Public Radio reported.

Did you know that Tyson, Perdue, Cargill, and JBS have all been found to have children working in their meat processing facilities? Join Food Sleuth Radio host and Registered Dietitian, Melinda Hemmelgarn for her conversation with Todd Larsen, MA, Executive Co-Director for Green America, who will explain how and why U.S. children are working in agriculture, restaurants, and meatpacking industries.Related Websites: www.enduschildlabor.org

Today, Americans are facing an affordability crisis. We're here after years of union busting, lax antitrust enforcement and corporate takeover of our democracy and now, fascism and oligarchy reigning over our society. So this Labor Day, I want to tell you about a woman whose courage, vision, and persistence transformed America and the American workplace: a woman who truly knew the meaning of affording your life, Secretary of Labor Frances Perkins.When President Franklin Roosevelt appointed her in 1933, Perkins became the first woman in U.S. history to serve in the Cabinet. But she was more than a symbol—she was a reformer, a fighter, and the architect of many of the protections we now take for granted.She came into office at the height of the Great Depression, when millions of Americans were out of work, when wages were low, hours were long, and protections were almost nonexistent. Frances Perkins had already seen the consequences of unsafe working conditions firsthand. As a young woman, she had watched the flames of the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire in 1911, when 146 garment workers—mostly immigrant women—died because they were locked inside a burning building. That tragedy seared into her the determination to make workers' lives safer, fairer, and more dignified.As Secretary of Labor, Perkins set out an ambitious agenda—and she achieved it. She helped design and implement the Social Security Act of 1935, which for the first time gave Americans a system of old-age pensions, unemployment insurance, and aid to families in need. She championed the Fair Labor Standards Act, which established the minimum wage, the 40-hour work week, and restrictions on child labor. She was instrumental in creating the Civilian Conservation Corps and Public Works Administration, which gave jobs to millions.Her guiding principle was simple but powerful: that the government has a responsibility to protect workers from exploitation and to ensure that prosperity is shared, not hoarded.Frances Perkins knew these reforms would not come easily. She faced resistance not only from business interests but also from members of Congress and even some within the Roosevelt administration. Yet she persisted. With intelligence, patience, and moral conviction, she turned ideas that seemed radical into law.Her legacy lives with us every day. When you receive a paycheck that honors overtime pay, when you see a child in school instead of working in a factory, when you know that your retirement is backed by Social Security—those are the reforms of Frances Perkins.She once said, “The people are what matter to government, and a government should aim to give all the people under its jurisdiction the best possible life.”This Labor Day, remember Secretary of Labor Frances Perkins, a true Affording Your Life visionary. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit affordingyourlife.substack.com

Monday, August 25th, 2025Today, the DOJ has released the audio and transcripts of the witness tampering meeting between Todd Blanche and Ghislaine Maxwell; the government has threatened to deport Kilmar Abrego to Uganda if he doesn't plead guilty to the two charges against him; John Bolton's house has been raided in search of classified emails sent on a private server; a federal judge orders the dismantling of the Florida concentration camp; Fort Bliss - where the Japanese were interned during WWII - is operating as an internment camp again; the White House lists Smithsonian exhibits it wants to erase from history; the Justice Department's release of the Epstein files to House Oversight is a joke; the Pentagon plans to deploy the military to Chicago; Homeland Security is violating the law by refusing to retain text messages; Illinois announces a first of its kind legal hotline for the LGBTQ community; residents keep repainting the Pulse nightclub rainbow sidewalk after the city keeps removing it; and Allison and Dana deliver your Good News.Thank You, HomeChefFor a limited time, get  50% off and free shipping for your first box PLUS free dessert for life!  HomeChef.com/DAILYBEANS.  Must be an active subscriber to receive free dessert.Thank You, Naked Winesnakedwines.com/DAILYBEANS and use code DAILYBEANS for both the code and password.Guest: Joyce VancePreorder Giving Up Is Unforgivable by Joyce Vance - 10/21/2025 Civil Discourse with Joyce Vance | Substack#SistersInLaw - Podcast - Apple Podcasts, The Insider Podcast - CAFE@joycewhitevance.bsky.social on BlueskyLive with Allison Gill and Joyce Vance | Joyce Vance SubstackLive with Allison Gill and Joyce Vance | MuellerSheWrote SubstackYou Can Nominate Dana Goldberg for this year's Out100!2025 Out100 Readers' ChoiceNational Security Counselors - DonateNPHC & FBF stand united w/ CDC, NIH, & other HHS agencies in formal dissent of HHS Sec Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. & his political rhetoric that led to the Aug 8 attack on CDC & his response. Help ensure safety of public servants. Hold RFK Jr accountable by signing the letter: savehhs.orghttps://bsky.app/profile/firedbutfighting.bsky.social/post/3lwtfq56klc2gStoriesJustice Dept. Sent Congress Epstein Files That Were Already Public, Democrats Say | The New York TimesNational Security Counselors - DonatePentagon plans military deployment in Chicago as Trump eyes crackdown | The Washington PostHomeland Security Tells Watchdog It Hasn't Kept Text Message Data Since April | The New York TimesJapanese American groups blast use of Fort Bliss, former internment camp site, as ICE detention center | NBC NewsWhite House Lists Smithsonian Exhibits It Finds Objectionable | The New York TimesFlorida ordered to dismantle Alligator Alcatraz over environmental impact | The Washington PostPritzker announces 'first of its kind' legal hotline for LGBTQ+ Illinoisans | Chicago Sun-TimesRainbow crosswalk repainted outside Pulse; Florida troopers seen standing by | News 6 Orlando Good Trouble IRS asks for public input on free tax filing options to inform congressional report | Internal Revenue Service From The Good NewsApplication of the Fair Labor Standards Act to Domestic Service - Comments open until September 2Joy SaxtonThe Art of Arpilleras under Augusto Pinochet's Authoritarian Rule – Retrospect JournalReminder - you can see the pod pics if you become a Patron. The good news pics are at the bottom of the show notes of each Patreon episode! That's just one of the perks of subscribing! patreon.com/muellershewrote Our Donation LinksNational Security Counselors - DonateMSW Media, Blue Wave California Victory Fund | ActBlueWhistleblowerAid.org/beansFederal workers - feel free to email AG at fedoath@pm.me and let me know what you're going to do, or just vent. I'm always here to listen. Find Upcoming Actions 50501 Movement, No Kings.org, Indivisible.orgDr. Allison Gill - Substack, BlueSky , TikTok, IG, TwitterDana Goldberg - BlueSky, Twitter, IG, facebook, danagoldberg.comCheck out more from MSW Media - Shows - MSW Media, Cleanup On Aisle 45 pod, The Breakdown | SubstackShare your Good News or Good TroubleMSW Good News and Good TroubleHave some good news; a confession; or a correction to share?Good News & Confessions - The Daily Beanshttps://www.dailybeanspod.com/confessional/ Listener Survey:http://survey.podtrac.com/start-survey.aspx?pubid=BffJOlI7qQcF&ver=shortFollow the Podcast on Apple:The Daily Beans on Apple PodcastsWant to support the show and get it ad-free and early?The Daily Beans | SupercastThe Daily Beans & Mueller, She Wrote | PatreonThe Daily Beans | Apple Podcasts

This week, we dig into the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit's new Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) collective action notice standard, the U.S. Department of Labor's (DOL's) relaunched Payroll Audit Independent Determination (PAID) program, and the DOL's scaled-back approach to wage and hour investigation penalties. Seventh Circuit's New Standard for FLSA Notice  The Seventh Circuit has introduced the Richards framework, a middle-ground standard for FLSA collective actions. This decision deepens the circuit split over notices to potential plaintiffs and could lead to Supreme Court involvement. Learn how this could impact your compliance strategies. DOL Relaunches PAID Program  The DOL has relaunched the PAID program, letting employers self-report FLSA violations to avoid litigation or liquidated damages. The program now covers select Family and Medical Leave Act corrections. Discover how this voluntary option supports compliance. Wage and Hour Investigation Penalties Scaled Back A new DOL directive reduces penalties during wage and hour audits. Liquidated damages won't apply in pre-litigation investigations but may still be pursued in litigation. See how this change could affect your risk management strategies.  -- Download our Wage & Hour Guide for Employers app: https://www.ebglaw.com/wage-hour-guide-for-employers-app. Visit our site for this week's Other Highlights and links: https://www.ebglaw.com/eltw401 Subscribe to #WorkforceWednesday: https://www.ebglaw.com/eltw-subscribe Visit http://www.EmploymentLawThisWeek.com This podcast is presented by Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. All rights are reserved. This audio recording includes information about legal issues and legal developments. Such materials are for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal developments. These informational materials are not intended, and should not be taken, as legal advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances, and these materials are not a substitute for the advice of competent counsel. The content reflects the personal views and opinions of the participants. No attorney-client relationship has been created by this audio recording. This audio recording may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules. The determination of the need for legal services and the choice of a lawyer are extremely important decisions and should not be based solely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. No representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.

In Episode 89 of The Kershner Files, Dave provides some updates regarding the price of Copper, H.R. 1319, and Canadian Bill C5. After those he delves into the the usual Survival Realty, Gun Shows, and now conferences & convention information. The remainder of the show is spent discussing an assortment of topics. Articles/topics discussed: Two Rivers Outfitter - The Premiere Online Preparedness Store DesignsbyDandTStore - Dave's Etsy Shop for fun clothing options Spot Prices for Gold (Au) and Silver (Ag) - from the davidjkershner.com website Survival Realty - featured properties and new listings State-by-State Gun Shows - from the davidjkershner.com website Conferences and Conventions - from the davidjkershner.com website Copper theft may increase as price of copper jumped 13% after Trump tariffs by Kassandra Gutierrez from ABC30 Action News (KFSN) H.R. 1319 - To amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 and the National Labor Relations Act to clarify the standard for determining whether an individual is an employee, and for other purposes Canadian Bill C5 - An Act to enact the Free Trade and Labour Mobility in Canada Act and the Building Canada Act Support Dave by visiting his new website at Two Rivers Outfitter for all of your preparedness needs and you can also visit his Etsy shop at DesignsbyDandTStore for fun clothing and merchandise options. Two Rivers Outfitter merchandise is available on both the Two Rivers Outfitter and the davidjkershner.com websites. Available for Purchase - Fiction: When Rome Stumbles | Hannibal is at the Gates | By the Dawn's Early Light | Colder Weather | A Time for Reckoning (paperback versions) | Fiction Series (paperback) | Fiction Series (audio) Available for Purchase - Non-Fiction: Preparing to Prepare (electronic/paperback) | Home Remedies (electronic/paperback) | Just a Small Gathering (paperback) | Just a Small Gathering (electronic)

In Harrington v. Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, Inc., the Ninth Circuit ruled that, in FLSA collective actions, federal courts must evaluate personal jurisdiction before allowing notices to out-of-state employees in nationwide claims—a move that strengthens employers' ability to challenge these cases. Key Takeaways for Employers Jurisdiction matters: Courts must confirm jurisdiction before notifying out-of-state employees. Limited forum shopping: Plaintiffs face limits to filing in unrelated jurisdictions. Stronger grounds for employers: Employers can challenge out-of-state claims with no forum ties. Arbitration implications: Courts may notify employees under arbitration agreements. In this episode of Employment Law This Week®, Epstein Becker Green attorney Courtney McFate describes the Harrington ruling and shares insights to help employers adapt and minimize costly lawsuits. Visit our site for this week's Other Highlights and links: https://www.ebglaw.com/eltw399 Subscribe to #WorkforceWednesday: https://www.ebglaw.com/eltw-subscribe Visit http://www.EmploymentLawThisWeek.com Download our Wage & Hour Guide for Employers app: https://www.ebglaw.com/wage-hour-guide-for-employers-app. This podcast is presented by Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. All rights are reserved. This audio recording includes information about legal issues and legal developments. Such materials are for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal developments. These informational materials are not intended, and should not be taken, as legal advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances, and these materials are not a substitute for the advice of competent counsel. The content reflects the personal views and opinions of the participants. No attorney-client relationship has been created by this audio recording. This audio recording may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules. The determination of the need for legal services and the choice of a lawyer are extremely important decisions and should not be based solely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. No representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.

Episode 64: In this episode, Timalyn breaks down a hot topic from the newly passed One Big Beautiful Bill Act, the No Tax on Overtime Act, and what it really means for working taxpayers starting in 2025. There has been a lot of confusion online suggesting that overtime income is completely tax-free. But is that true? Not exactly. Timalyn explains how the law allows an above-the-line deduction for qualifying overtime income. That means you can deduct a portion of your overtime pay from your taxable income, but it is not completely exempt. She walks you through who qualifies, how much can be deducted, and what income limits apply.  Here is a quick breakdown: ✔️ If you are filing single, you can deduct up to $12,500 ✔️ Married couples filing jointly can deduct up to $25,000 ❌ Married filing separately does not qualify for this deduction There are income phaseouts to be aware of. If your income exceeds $150,000 as a single filer or head of household, or $300,000 if married filing jointly, the deduction decreases by $100 for every $1,000 you earn over the limit. Timalyn also explains how employers will report this on your W-2 and what counts as premium overtime pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Only the premium portion, meaning the amount you earn above your regular rate, will qualify for the deduction. This deduction is not permanent. It only applies to tax years 2025 through 2028. There is also a Social Security number requirement, and this may affect how couples decide whether to file jointly or separately. Please note that this deduction only applies to income tax. It does not apply to social security, Medicare, state, or local taxes. Need Tax Help Now? If you are currently facing an audit or have received a notice, schedule a consultation with Timalyn through her website: www.bowenstaxsolutions.com As we conclude Episode 64, make sure to subscribe on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or your favorite podcast platform. Remember, Timalyn Bowens is America's Favorite EA, and she's here to fill the tax literacy gap — one taxpayer at a time. Thank you for listening to today's episode. For more information about tax relief, visit: https://www.Bowenstaxsolutions.com. Got feedback or an episode suggestion? If you have any feedback or suggestions for an upcoming episode topic, please submit them here: https://www.americasfavoriteea.com/contact. Disclaimer: This podcast is for informational and educational purposes only. It provides a framework and possible solutions for solving your tax problems, but it is not legally binding. Please consult your tax professional regarding your specific tax situation.

In episode 208, Coffey talks with David Miklas about the Department of Labor's evolving definitions and interpretations of independent contractor classification under the Fair Labor Standards Act.  They discuss why DOL interpretations matter for FLSA compliance and overtime requirements; the shift from Biden administration's six-factor economic reality test back to Trump administration's emphasis on control and profit/loss opportunity; the six key factors including nature and degree of control, opportunity for profit and loss, permanence of relationship, worker investments, skill and initiative requirements, and how integral the work is to the principal business; common classification mistakes across industries including misunderstanding IRS versus DOL tests; the risks of supervision and control over workers classified as contractors; how technology can demonstrate control in gig economy situations; the financial consequences of misclassification including unpaid overtime, liquidated damages, and attorney fees; and the importance of proper written agreements and immediate legal consultation when classification issues arise. Good Morning, HR is brought to you by Imperative—Bulletproof Background Checks. For more information about our commitment to quality and excellent customer service, visit us at https://imperativeinfo.com.  If you are an HRCI or SHRM-certified professional, this episode of Good Morning, HR has been pre-approved for half a recertification credit. To obtain the recertification information for this episode, visit https://goodmorninghr.com.  About our Guest: David Miklas owns a Labor & Employment law firm and for 26 years he has practiced all types of labor and employment law exclusively representing Florida employers. He has written hundreds of employment law articles, is the co-author for the premier legal textbook used by lawyers for Florida employment law, is a frequent employment law presenter and is a nationally recognized speaker and an invited guest lecturer addressing employment law and human resource issues with over thirty universities, including Harvard. Mr. Miklas graduated from the University of Florida College of Law. David Miklas can be reached athttps://www.miklasemploymentlaw.com/https://www.linkedin.com/in/david-miklas-301861121/  About Mike Coffey: Mike Coffey is an entrepreneur, licensed private investigator, business strategist, HR consultant, and registered yoga teacher.In 1999, he founded Imperative, a background investigations and due diligence firm helping risk-averse clients make well-informed decisions about the people they involve in their business.Imperative delivers in-depth employment background investigations, know-your-customer and anti-money laundering compliance, and due diligence investigations to more than 300 risk-averse corporate clients across the US, and, through its PFC Caregiver & Household Screening brand, many more private estates, family offices, and personal service agencies.Imperative has been named a Best Places to Work, the Texas Association of Business' small business of the year, and is accredited by the Professional Background Screening Association.Mike shares his insight from 25+ years of HR-entrepreneurship on the Good Morning, HR podcast, where each week he talks to business leaders about bringing people together to create value for customers, shareholders, and community.Mike has been recognized as an Entrepreneur of Excellence by FW, Inc. and has twice been recognized as the North Texas HR Professional of the Year. Mike serves as a board member of a number of organizations, including the Texas State Council, where he serves Texas' 31 SHRM chapters as State Director-Elect; Workforce Solutions for Tarrant County; the Texas Association of Business; and the Fort Worth Chamber of Commerce, where he is chair of the Talent Committee.Mike is a certified Senior Professional in Human Resources (SPHR) through the HR Certification Institute and a SHRM Senior Certified Professional (SHRM-SCP). He is also a Yoga Alliance registered yoga teacher (RYT-200) and teaches multiple times each week. Mike and his very patient wife of 28 years are empty nesters in Fort Worth.   Learning Objectives: 1.       Evaluate worker relationships using the Trump Administration's six-factor economic reality test.2.       Differentiate between US Department of Labor independent contractor definitions and those of the and IRS and state regulators.3.       Respond appropriately to classification concerns to avoid liability.

This week, we're covering the U.S. Department of Labor's (DOL's) decision to halt enforcement of the Biden-era independent contractor rule, the upcoming EEO-1 reporting season (starting on May 20), and New York State's new labor law amendment, reducing damages for first-time frequency-of-pay violations.­ DOL Halts Enforcement of Independent Contractor Rule The DOL will no longer enforce the Biden-era independent contractor rule, which sought to tighten the criteria under which a hired worker can be considered an independent contractor for purposes of the Fair Labor Standards Act. The agency will now revert to the less stringent "economic realities" test. EEO-1 Reporting Begins Soon The proposed 2024 EEO-1 Component 1 data collection season is scheduled to begin on May 20, with a deadline to file by June 24. As expected, Component 2 pay data collection will not be required this year or in the coming years. New York Amends Labor Law to Limit Damages in Frequency-of-Pay Lawsuits New York Governor Kathy Hochul signed into law a budget bill that includes an amendment to the New York Labor Law that dramatically limits the relief employees can seek for first-time violations of frequency-of-pay provisions.  Visit our site for this week's Other Highlights and links: https://www.ebglaw.com/eltw390 Subscribe to #WorkforceWednesday: https://www.ebglaw.com/subscribe/ Visit http://www.EmploymentLawThisWeek.com This podcast is presented by Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. All rights are reserved. This audio recording includes information about legal issues and legal developments. Such materials are for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal developments. These informational materials are not intended, and should not be taken, as legal advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances, and these materials are not a substitute for the advice of competent counsel. The content reflects the personal views and opinions of the participants. No attorney-client relationship has been created by this audio recording. This audio recording may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules. The determination of the need for legal services and the choice of a lawyer are extremely important decisions and should not be based solely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. No representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.

Comment on the Show by Sending Mark a Text Message.This episode is part of my initiative to provide access to important court decisions  impacting employees in an easy to understand conversational format using AI.  The speakers in the episode are AI generated and frankly sound great to listen to.  Enjoy!The scales of workplace justice have just shifted. In a unanimous decision that has sent ripples through labor law circles, the Supreme Court has lowered the standard of proof employers need to demonstrate when classifying workers as exempt from overtime pay.At the heart of this groundbreaking case lies EMD Sales, a food distributor whose sales representatives spent long 60-hour weeks stocking shelves, managing inventory, and processing orders at grocery stores across the Washington DC area. These employees, paid only on commission, sued for overtime compensation under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). EMD claimed they were "outside salesmen" – exempt from overtime requirements – but did their day-to-day responsibilities actually constitute "making sales"? The answer depended heavily on whether they were working at chain stores with pre-established corporate agreements or at independent shops where they had more sales autonomy.The Supreme Court didn't rule on whether these particular workers deserved overtime. Instead, they focused on a crucial procedural question: what level of proof should employers need to show when claiming a worker is exempt? Previously, in the Fourth Circuit, employers needed to meet a high "clear and convincing evidence" standard. Now, the Court has established nationwide that only a "preponderance of evidence" – essentially just over 50% likelihood – is required. This seemingly technical change could significantly impact millions of workers' overtime eligibility and shift the power balance in workplace disputes across America.The next time you're wondering whether your job qualifies for overtime protection, remember this watershed case. Understanding your rights has never been more important as the legal landscape evolves. Subscribe to our podcast for more deep dives into the court decisions that directly impact your workplace rights and compensation. If you enjoyed this episode of the Employee Survival Guide please like us on Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn. We would really appreciate if you could leave a review of this podcast on your favorite podcast player such as Apple Podcasts. Leaving a review will inform other listeners you found the content on this podcast is important in the area of employment law in the United States. For more information, please contact our employment attorneys at Carey & Associates, P.C. at 203-255-4150, www.capclaw.com.Disclaimer: For educational use only, not intended to be legal advice.

Scale AI is being investigated by the U.S. Department of Labor for compliance with the Fair Labor Standards Act. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In this episode of Hiring to Firing, hosts Tracey Diamond and Emily Schifter dive into the intriguing intersection of reality TV and employment law. Joined by Troutman Pepper Locke Labor and Employment Partner Richard Reibstein (author of the popular Independent Contractor Misclassification & Compliance blog), they explore the lawsuit alleging that contestants on the hit Netflix reality series Love Is Blind have been misclassified as independent contractors instead of employees — and the real-life implications for other production companies as well as companies in other industries. Tune in for an insightful discussion that ‎blends legal expertise with the drama of reality television.‎Troutman Pepper Locke's Labor + Employment Practice Group provides comprehensive thought leadership through various channels. We regularly issue advisories that offer timely insights into the evolving employment law landscape, and maintain the HiringToFiring.Law Blog, a resource spotlighting best practices for employers. Our Hiring to Firing Podcast, hosted by Tracey Diamond and Emily Schifter, delves into pressing labor and employment law topics, drawing unique parallels from pop culture, hit shows, and movies.

E.M.D. Sales, Inc. v. Carrera concerns what standard of evidence the court should apply in cases of exceptions to the Fair Labor Standards Act. The District Court decided that E.M.D. was liable for some employee overtime because it did not prove by clear and convincing evidence that its sales representatives were outside salesmen. Therefore, they […]

In this case, the court considered this issue: Is the burden of proof that employers must satisfy to demonstrate the applicability of a Fair Labor Standards Act exemption a mere preponderance of the evidence or clear and convincing evidence? The case was decided on January 15, 2025. The Supreme Court held that the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard applies when an employer seeks to show that an employee is exempt from the minimum-wage and overtime-pay provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Justice Brett Kavanaugh authored the unanimous opinion of the Court. The default standard of proof in American civil litigation is preponderance of the evidence, and courts only deviate from this standard in three specific circumstances: when a statute explicitly requires a heightened standard, when the Constitution requires it, or in certain rare cases where the government seeks unusual coercive action against an individual (like revoking citizenship). None of these exceptions applies to FLSA exemption cases. The FLSA itself is silent on the standard of proof, which typically means Congress intended the default preponderance standard to apply. The case does not implicate constitutional rights, and it does not involve unusual government coercion; instead, it is akin to Title VII employment discrimination cases where the Court has consistently applied the preponderance standard. Justice Neil Gorsuch authored a concurring opinion, in which Justice Clarence Thomas joined, clarifying that courts apply the default “preponderance” rule unless Congress alters it or the Constitution forbids it. The opinion is presented here in its entirety, but with citations omitted. If you appreciate this episode, please subscribe. Thank you. 

E.M.D. Sales, Inc. v. Carrera concerns what standard of evidence the court should apply in cases of exceptions to the Fair Labor Standards Act. The District Court decided that E.M.D. was liable for some employee overtime because it did not prove by clear and convincing evidence that its sales representatives were outside salesmen. Therefore, they were not exempt from normal overtime rules. The Fourth Circut agreed, affirming the use of the clear-and-convincing evidence standard.On January 15th, 2025, the Supreme Court, in a 9-0 decision, reversed the Fourth Circut’s decision and remanded the case. In an opinion by Justice Kavanaugh, it held that the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard applies when an employer seeks to show that an employee is exempt from the minimum wage and overtime pay provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act.Featuring:Michael J. O'Neill, Vice President of Legal Affairs, Landmark Legal Foundation

Join Chase Stoecker and Courtney Joiner, Members of McGlinchey's Labor and Employment Practice Group, as they discuss how a new administration could impact overtime laws and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. They explore changes to Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) salary thresholds, legal challenges to DEI programs, and strategies for employers to adapt to potential regulatory shifts.

In this episode of the Friends for Life Podcast, we dive into the U.S. Department of Labor's groundbreaking proposal to phase out 14(c) certificates, a decades-old provision allowing employers to pay workers with disabilities less than minimum wage. This historic move marks a pivotal step toward ending subminimum wage employment and fostering greater economic equity and community inclusion for individuals with disabilities. We explore the legal and policy advancements that have dramatically expanded employment opportunities since the 1938 Fair Labor Standards Act and discuss the significant decline in the use of 14(c) certificates over the years. With nearly half of the workers under this model earning $3.50 an hour or less, advocates argue that the time has come to prioritize fair wages and competitive employment. However, the proposed changes are not without controversy. We examine the challenges raised by those who believe sheltered workshops still play a critical role for individuals with severe disabilities requiring highly specialized support. Additionally, we discuss how disability advocacy groups like the Autistic Self Advocacy Network are urging Congress to pass legislation that would ensure a smooth transition to inclusive employment opportunities for all. Join us for an in-depth look at this crucial moment in disability rights history and the ongoing debate about how best to support individuals with disabilities in achieving meaningful, dignified work.

Join host Dan Schwartz and Sarah Westby, partners at Shipman & Goodwin, as they delve into the latest wage and hour regulations under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). This episode explores the implications of a federal court ruling that struck down recent DOL salary threshold increases, what it means for employers, and how businesses can navigate compliance amidst evolving rules. Discover practical insights and strategies to manage workforce morale, stay aligned with state and federal laws, and anticipate future regulatory changes.

E.M.D. Sales, Inc. v. Carrera concerns what standard the court should apply in cases of exceptions to the Fair Labor Standards Act. This act governs such limitations as hours worked, overtime pay, and working conditions across the United States. Several provisions within it exempt certain industries from some requirements, and this case deals with the burden of proof on a corporation to prove that an employee should be exempt from these rules.The plaintiffs in this case are two employees of a food distribution company, who sued for overtime benefits citing the Fair Labor Standards Act. The company argued that their positions were those of salesmen, who are normally exempted from overtime pay rules. The plaintiffs allege that making sales was a secondary part of their numerous responsibilities that were not overtime exempt. The district court agreed that E.M.D failed to prove a sales exemption, and the Fourth Circut Court of Appeals affirmed.Currently, the case is before the Supreme Court, with oral arguments on November 5th. Join Michael O'Neill, Vice President of Legal Affairs at Landmark Legal Foundation, and Cheryl Stanton, Chief Legal and Government Affairs Officer at BrightStar Care, as they review oral arguments and discuss this case and its implications.Featuring:Michael J. O'Neill, Vice President of Legal Affairs, Landmark Legal Foundation(Moderator) Cheryl M. Stanton, Chief Legal and Government Affairs Officer, BrightStar Care

After processing the election and thinking through what it means for the future of the Supreme Court, Kate and Leah dig into a Voting Rights Act case newly added to SCOTUS's docket. They also tackle this week's cases on the False Claims Act, compensation for hospitals that treat low-income people, the Fair Labor Standards Act, and federal securities law. Follow us on Instagram, Twitter, Threads, and Bluesky

Last week, the US elected its 47th president. As I was sifting through the reactions of family, friends, and coworkers online, feelings of excitement and feelings of sadness were all over the place, and it was a lot to think about. But the thing I kept coming back to was the mission of I Hate It Here and the ways that elections affect us all! So today, we're taking a stroll down HR memory lane, digging into the laws that flipped the script on how we work. From the Fair Labor Standards Act to the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, we're exploring the major pieces of legislation that shaped HR as we know it. Now, Working Not Working is helping to keep that talent with NTRNL— the new platform that unlocks employee passions and ignites productivity. So you can see your people as they see themselves: as humans, not headcount. Visit seeyourpeople.com to learn more or book a demo. 00:01:00 - The Misson of I Hate It Here 00:01:50 - The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) 00:03:55 - The Civil Rights Act of 1964 00:06:00 - The Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) 00:08:05 - The Employee of Income Retirement Security Act (ERISA) 00:10:04 - The Americans With Disability Act 00:11:04 - The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) 00:13:17 - The Affordable Care Act 00:15:05 - The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act 00:17:40 - The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act And if you love I Hate It Here, sign up to Hebba's newsletter! It's for jaded, overworked, and emotionally burnt-out HR/People Operations professionals needing a little inspiration. https://workweek.com/discover-newsletters/i-hate-it-here-newsletter/   And if you love the podcast, be sure to check out https://www.youtube.com/@ihateit-here for even more exclusive insider content! Follow Hebba:  YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@ihateit-here/videos LinkedIn: https://linkedin.com/in/hebba-youssef Twitter: https://twitter.com/hebbamyoussef

A case in which the Court will decide whether the burden of proof that employers must satisfy to demonstrate the applicability of a Fair Labor Standards Act exemption is a mere preponderance of the evidence or clear and convincing evidence.

Each month, a panel of constitutional experts convenes to discuss the Court’s upcoming docket sitting by sitting. The cases covered in this preview are listed below.Wisconsin Bell v. U.S., (November 4) - Telecommunications; Whether reimbursement requests submitted to the Federal Communications Commission's E-rate program are “claims” under the False Claims Act.Advocate Christ Medical Center v. Becerra, (November 5) - Medicare; Whether the phrase “entitled ... to benefits,” used twice in the same sentence of the Medicare Act, means the same thing for Medicare part A and Supplemental Social Security benefits, such that it includes all who meet basic program eligibility criteria, whether or not benefits are actually received.E.M.D. Sales v. Carrera, (November 5) - Labor & Employment; Whether the burden of proof that employers must satisfy to demonstrate the applicability of a Fair Labor Standards Act exemption is a mere preponderance of the evidence or clear and convincing evidence.Facebook v. Amalgamated Bank, (November 6) - Corporations; Whether risk disclosures are false or misleading when they do not disclose that a risk has materialized in the past, even if that past event presents no known risk of ongoing or future business harm.Velazquez v. Garland, (November 12) - International and National Security; Whether, when a noncitizen's voluntary-departure period ends on a weekend or public holiday, a motion to reopen filed the next business day is sufficient to avoid the penalties for failure to depart under 8 U.S.C. § 1229c(d)(1).Delligatti v. U.S., (November 12) - Criminal Law & Procedure; Issue(s): Whether a crime that requires proof of bodily injury or death, but can be committed by failing to take action, has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force.NVIDIA Corp. v. E. Ohman J:or Fonder AB, (November 13) - Securities; (1) Whether plaintiffs seeking to allege scienter under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act based on allegations about internal company documents must plead with particularity the contents of those documents; and (2) whether plaintiffs can satisfy the Act's falsity requirement by relying on an expert opinion to substitute for particularized allegations of fact.Featuring:Tyler S. Badgley, Senior Counsel, U.S. Chamber Litigation CenterKaren Harned, President, Harned Strategies LLCRobert S. Peck, President, Center for Constitutional LitigationCollin White, Of Counsel, Kellogg Hansen(Moderator) Sarah Child, Attorney, Jackson Lewis

Creative News This episode we educate through the testimony of Lisa Bennett, Lifelong Special Needs Educator and former Regional Manager of Creative Enterprises. The 14C of the Fair Labor Standards Act or sub-minimum wage certificate was created by the Deportment of Labor in 1938 and permits paying people with disabilities wages below minimum wage. The Department of […]

This Day in Legal History: Formal Immigration Quotas EndOn October 3, 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Immigration and Nationality Act into law, marking a significant shift in U.S. immigration policy. This legislation, also known as the Hart-Celler Act, abolished the national origins quota system that had been in place since 1924, which favored European immigrants and limited others. Johnson, during a ceremony at the Statue of Liberty, called the old system "un-American" and discriminatory. The new law established a more equitable process, allowing a set number of immigrants from each country with no preference based on nationality.The Act also prioritized family reunification and skilled labor, changing the face of American immigration by allowing greater numbers of immigrants from Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Though the total cap on immigration was still in place, the changes sparked a demographic transformation that led to the multicultural U.S. society seen today. This law was part of Johnson's broader Great Society program, aimed at promoting civil rights and social reforms. Despite fears at the time that it would open the floodgates for immigration, the Act is now regarded as a key milestone in modernizing U.S. immigration policy.On November 5, 2024, eight U.S. states will vote on constitutional amendments to ban noncitizens from voting, even though it is already illegal. These states include key swing states North Carolina and Wisconsin, as well as Republican strongholds like Idaho, Iowa, and South Carolina. Supporters of the measures argue they address concerns over illegal immigration and the integrity of U.S. elections. Critics, however, view this as part of a broader effort by Donald Trump and his allies to undermine confidence in the electoral process. They fear it could be used to challenge the results if Trump loses the presidential election.While some localities allow legal noncitizens to vote in municipal elections, noncitizen voting in federal elections remains illegal. Independent studies and election officials from both parties confirm that noncitizen voting is rare. Nonetheless, Trump's repeated claims of widespread illegal voting, especially from immigrants, have fueled distrust among his supporters, despite a lack of evidence. These ballot measures follow ongoing lawsuits and legislative attempts by Republicans to tighten voter registration rules.Eight US states to vote on amendments to ban noncitizen voters | ReutersThe U.S. Supreme Court will address several key employment law issues in its upcoming term. One significant case, Williams v. Washington, questions whether workers must exhaust state administrative remedies before filing federal civil rights claims in state court. Another case, Lackey v. Stinnie, will explore whether securing a preliminary injunction in civil rights litigation qualifies a plaintiff as a "prevailing party" entitled to attorney's fees.In Medical Marijuana Inc. v. Horn, the justices will consider if a truck driver can use the RICO Act to sue a CBD manufacturer whose mislabeled product allegedly caused him to fail a drug test and lose his job. This case hinges on whether job loss qualifies as an economic injury under RICO.Additionally, the Court will evaluate the burden employers must meet when proving workers are exempt from federal overtime requirements in EMD Sales Inc. v. Carrera U.S.. The case could affect how easily employees can claim overtime pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act.Lastly, Stanley v. City of Sanford will clarify whether the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) protects former employees against discrimination in post-employment policies. This decision could impact how employers handle benefits for disabled ex-workers.Justices to Hear Cases on Drug Tests and Ex-Worker ADA RightsThe U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has appealed a court ruling that ordered Ripple Labs Inc. to pay a $125 million civil penalty for improperly selling its XRP token, far less than the $2 billion the SEC initially sought. The lawsuit, filed in 2020, accused Ripple of illegally raising funds by selling XRP without registering it as a security. The case is significant for the cryptocurrency industry, as it could shape the SEC's authority over digital assets.In a 2023 ruling, U.S. District Judge Analisa Torres determined that XRP sales to institutional investors were subject to securities laws, but those to retail investors were not, a decision seen as a win for Ripple and the broader crypto sector. While the SEC sought nearly $2 billion in penalties and disgorgements, Torres only imposed the smaller civil penalty. Ripple's CEO, Brad Garlinghouse, criticized the SEC's persistence in the case, claiming it harmed the agency's reputation and did not protect investors.The SEC, however, maintains that the decision contradicts long-standing Supreme Court precedent and securities law, prompting its appeal.SEC Appeals $125 Million Judgment in Ripple Labs XRP Lawsuit (1)Prosecutors have argued that Donald Trump should stand trial for his efforts to overturn the 2020 election, emphasizing that his actions were those of a private citizen, not protected by presidential immunity. A newly unsealed court brief details Trump's pressure on former Vice President Mike Pence to intervene in the certification of Joe Biden's victory. The filing also recounts how Trump dismissed concerns for Pence's safety during the Capitol riot with a remark of "So what?" when informed that Pence was in danger.The filing reveals prosecutors' intention to use swing-state officials, iPhone data, and private conversations to demonstrate Trump's knowledge that his fraud claims were false. They contend Trump continued to pursue election interference despite being informed by close advisors, including Pence, that his claims were baseless. Additionally, the government will argue that Trump, as a candidate, pressed state officials to reject Biden's win, despite having no official role in the electoral process.Trump's defense has focused on his communications with Pence, suggesting these might be protected by presidential immunity. However, the prosecution asserts that Trump's conduct, including his pressure on Pence, was part of a private scheme, not covered by immunity guidelines.Trump Said ‘So What' When Told of Pence Peril on Jan. 6, US Says This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Send us a Text Message.NOTE: Rudy is a Pool Guy, Dammit! Not a labor law attorney or expert... That said - In this conversation, Rudy Stankowitz discusses the topic of how to pay swimming pool technicians. He explores the different methods of payment, including per pool, hourly, and piecework pay. Rudy explains the intricacies of piecework compensation and the guidelines set by the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). He emphasizes the importance of ensuring compliance with federal and state laws, calculating regular and overtime pay, and tracking hours worked. Rudy also highlights the advantages and challenges of implementing a piecework pay system and provides tips for setting fair rates and maintaining transparency with employees.keywordsswimming pool technicians, pay methods, per pool pay, hourly pay, piecework pay, Fair Labor Standards Act, FLSA, compliance, regular rate of pay, overtime pay, advantages, challenges, setting fair rates, transparencytakeawaysThere are different methods of paying swimming pool technicians, including per pool, hourly, and piecework pay.Piecework pay involves compensating employees based on the number of pools they service rather than the hours they work.Compliance with the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) is crucial when implementing piecework pay.Calculating the regular rate of pay and overtime pay is necessary to ensure fair compensation.Implementing a piecework pay system can increase productivity and job satisfaction, but challenges such as maintaining quality and variability in pay should be considered.Setting fair rates and maintaining transparency with employees are important for the success of a piecework pay system.titlesCalculating the Regular Rate of Pay and Overtime PayUnd AquaStar Pool ProductsThe Global Leader in Safety, Dependability, & Innovation in Pool Technology.POOL MAGAZINE Pool Magazine is leading up to the minute news source for Swimming Pool News and Pool Features. OuBLUERAY XLThe real mineral purifier! Reduce your pool maintenance costs & efforts by 50%Jack's MagicIf you know Jack's you'd have no stains!RaypakRaypak, leading the evolution of environmental efficiency and sustainability in pool heaters.the 'How to Get Rid of Algae' handbookThe most comprehensive guide on algae prevention and remediation you will ever own. Online Pool ClassesThe difference between you and your competition is what you know!CPO Certification ClassesAttend your CPO class with Rudy Stankowitz!Disclaimer: This post contains affiliate links. If you make a purchase, I may receive a commission at no extra cost to you.Support the Show.Thank you so much for listening! You can find us on social media: Facebook Instagram Tik Tok Email us: talkingpools@gmail.com

On this episode of Conduct Detrimental: THE Sports Law Podcast, Dan Lust (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@SportsLawLust)⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠and Mike Kravchenko (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Find him on YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) are joined by Bobby Hartwick (@BobbyHartwick) to bring you the latest updates in sports law as we find ourselves with yet another a jam-packed week across the board. The trio dives into the NBA-TNT matching rights drama. Warner Bros., the parent company of TNT, recently exercised its matching rights on one of the deals proposed for the NBA's broadcasting rights. This move has sparked a debate about whether TNT can truly match the streaming services like Amazon Prime. Dan explains the potential legal and contractual hurdles, including the possibility of arbitration, and the implications for the NBA's broadcasting landscape. Next, they cover the new lawsuit filed by the Olympic and Paralympic Committee against PRIME, the energy drink owned by Logan Paul and KSI. The lawsuit claims PRIME infringed on the committee's trademarks by using phrases and symbols associated with the Olympics, such as "three-time Olympic gold medalist" and "repping Team USA." The trio discusses the legal intricacies of trademark enforcement and the potential repercussions for Prime. Odell Beckham Jr.'s recent legal battle with Nike also gets attention. Despite Beckham's celebratory social media post claiming victory, Nike's statement asserts that all of Beckham's claims were decided against him without any monetary award. This confusing narrative underscores the importance of clear legal communications and the broader implications for athlete endorsement deals. The conversation then shifts to a humorous yet important trademark dispute between Lamar Jackson and Troy Aikman over the word "eight." Jackson blocked Aikman's attempt to trademark "eight," claiming potential consumer confusion with his own trademarks like "Era 8" and "You 8 Yet." The group discusses the complexities of trademark law in sports and the likelihood of a coexistence agreement. Bobby shares his insights into the Johnson vs. NCAA case as Trey Johnson, a former Villanova football player, along with other student-athletes, filed a class action lawsuit against the NCAA and several universities, arguing they should be classified as employees under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that student-athletes could potentially qualify as employees, which could have major financial and compliance implications for colleges. The case was remanded to the district court to apply the new economic realities test, setting a precedent for evaluating student-athletes' employment status. Mike shares his excitement for Netflix's upcoming "Untold" documentary series, which includes episodes on the Michigan sign-stealing scandal and other intriguing sports stories. Bobby recommends watching the Giants' "Hard Knocks" series for its in-depth look at front office operations and player evaluations, wrapping up a packed episode of sports law updates and insights. Have a topic you want to write about? ANYONE and EVERYONE can publish for ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ConductDetrimental.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Let us know if you want to join the team. *** As always, this episode is sponsored by Themis Bar Review: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.themisbarsocial.com/conductdetrimental⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠  Host: Dan Lust (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@SportsLawLust⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠)  Featuring and Produced by: Mike Kravchenko (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Watch on YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) Guest: Bobby Hartwick (⁠@BobbyHartwick⁠) Connect with us:⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠TikTok⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠Website⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠Email --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/condetrimental/support

On this episode of Conduct Detrimental: THE Sports Law Podcast, Dan Lust (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@SportsLawLust)⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠and Mike Kravchenko (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Find him on YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) are joined by Bobby Hartwick (@BobbyHartwick) to bring you the latest updates in sports law as we find ourselves with yet another a jam-packed week across the board. The trio dives into the NBA-TNT matching rights drama. Warner Bros., the parent company of TNT, recently exercised its matching rights on one of the deals proposed for the NBA's broadcasting rights. This move has sparked a debate about whether TNT can truly match the streaming services like Amazon Prime. Dan explains the potential legal and contractual hurdles, including the possibility of arbitration, and the implications for the NBA's broadcasting landscape. Next, they cover the new lawsuit filed by the Olympic and Paralympic Committee against PRIME, the energy drink owned by Logan Paul and KSI. The lawsuit claims PRIME infringed on the committee's trademarks by using phrases and symbols associated with the Olympics, such as "three-time Olympic gold medalist" and "repping Team USA." The trio discusses the legal intricacies of trademark enforcement and the potential repercussions for Prime. Odell Beckham Jr.'s recent legal battle with Nike also gets attention. Despite Beckham's celebratory social media post claiming victory, Nike's statement asserts that all of Beckham's claims were decided against him without any monetary award. This confusing narrative underscores the importance of clear legal communications and the broader implications for athlete endorsement deals. The conversation then shifts to a humorous yet important trademark dispute between Lamar Jackson and Troy Aikman over the word "eight." Jackson blocked Aikman's attempt to trademark "eight," claiming potential consumer confusion with his own trademarks like "Era 8" and "You 8 Yet." The group discusses the complexities of trademark law in sports and the likelihood of a coexistence agreement. Bobby shares his insights into the Johnson vs. NCAA case as Trey Johnson, a former Villanova football player, along with other student-athletes, filed a class action lawsuit against the NCAA and several universities, arguing they should be classified as employees under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that student-athletes could potentially qualify as employees, which could have major financial and compliance implications for colleges. The case was remanded to the district court to apply the new economic realities test, setting a precedent for evaluating student-athletes' employment status. Mike shares his excitement for Netflix's upcoming "Untold" documentary series, which includes episodes on the Michigan sign-stealing scandal and other intriguing sports stories. Bobby recommends watching the Giants' "Hard Knocks" series for its in-depth look at front office operations and player evaluations, wrapping up a packed episode of sports law updates and insights. Have a topic you want to write about? ANYONE and EVERYONE can publish for ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ConductDetrimental.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Let us know if you want to join the team. *** As always, this episode is sponsored by Themis Bar Review: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.themisbarsocial.com/conductdetrimental⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠  Host: Dan Lust (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@SportsLawLust⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠)  Featuring and Produced by: Mike Kravchenko (⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Watch on YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠) Guest: Bobby Hartwick (⁠@BobbyHartwick⁠) Connect with us:⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠TikTok⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠Website⁠⁠⁠⁠ | ⁠⁠⁠⁠Email --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/condetrimental/support

The U.S. Supreme Court recently handed down one of the most significant decisions in decades. In Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, a case involving a little-known National Marine Fisheries Service regulation, SCOTUS overturned the Chevron doctrine, and in so doing, removed the forty-year old legal foundation that many federal agencies relied upon when promulgating their regulations. In this first of several podcasts to examine the impact of Loper Bright in various industries and practice groups, Labor & Employment Practice Group member Logan C. Hibbs joins Briefly Legal to discuss the two-step test used to determine the amount of deference given to federal agencies when determining the validity of agency regulations under the now defunct Chevron doctrine, and the potential impacts the Court's ruling in Loper Bright could have on ongoing litigation involving workplace regulations including, the Department of Labor's (DOL) new Rule on wage requirements for exempt workers under the Fair Labor Standards Act, the National Labor Relations Board's joint-employer rule, and the DOL's new Rule on who is an independent contractor and who is an employee. About Logan C. HibbsAdditional Resources Chevron Overruled - What Does this Mean for Employers?Connect with Crowe & Dunlevy:Website | Facebook | Twitter | LinkedIn

On this episode, we tackle the recent Third Circuit decision in Johnson vs. NCAA, where the court held that the “frayed tradition of amateurism” does not prevent college athletes from being classified as employees under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The decision doesn't mean that college athletes ARE now employees, but it means that they could be. What does it all mean and where do we go from here? To help me break it all down, I am joined by Joshua Nadreau, Regional Managing partner and Chair of the Labor Relations Group at Fisher Phillips. Thank you for listening! For the latest in sports law news and analysis, you can follow Gabe Feldman on twitter @sportslawguy .

Spending bills in Congress would stop any speed limiter requirement, and also deal with truck parking, ELDs and independent contractors. Land Line Now also updates you on a partnership that includes Daimler Truck is working on a nationwide network of EV charging stations for heavy-duty zero-emission vehicles. And the Pennsylvania Turnpike is moving to open road tolling, following several other toll roads that have done so. 0:00 – Newscast.  10:14 – Partnership aims to plug in electric trucks. 25:09 – Another turnpike goes to open road tolling. 40:09 – Spending bill would ban speed limiter requirement.

Merriam-Webster's Word of the Day for May 31, 2024 is: foist • FOIST • verb Foist, which is almost always used with on or upon, is used when someone forces another person to accept something, usually something that is not good or is not wanted. Foist can also mean “to pass off as genuine or worthy.” // I don't want to foist anything on you, but if you like this old quilt you're welcome to have it. // Faulty parts have been foisted on unwitting car owners. See the entry > Examples: “Since the passage of the Fair Labor Standards Act during the New Deal era, employers have had to pay most of their workers for 40 hours of work even when business was slow. That was just the cost of doing business, a risk capitalists bore in exchange for the upside potential of profit. Now, however, employers foist that risk onto their lowest-paid workers: Part-time employees, not shareholders, have to pay the price when sale volumes fluctuate.” — Adelle Waldman, The New York Times, 19 Feb. 2024 Did you know? That the word foist is commonly used today to mean “to force another to accept by stealth or deceit” makes sense given its original—now obsolete—use in talking about a bit of literal sleight of hand. When it first rolled into English in the mid-1500s, foist was all about dice, dice, baby, referring to palming—that is, concealing in one's hand a phony die so as to secretly introduce it into a game at a convenient time. The action involved in this cheating tactic reflects the etymology of foist: the word is believed to have come from the obsolete Dutch verb vuisten, meaning “to take into one's hand.” Vuisten in turn comes from vuyst, the Middle Dutch word for “fist,” which itself is distantly related to the Old English ancestor of fist. By the late 16th century, foist was being used in English to mean “to insert surreptitiously,” and it quickly acquired the “force to accept” meaning that is most familiar today.

The 32-hour workweek. Last Wednesday, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) introduced a bill to federally mandate a 32-hour workweek. Sanders's bill is the Senate companion to a bill introduced by Rep. Mark Takano (D-CA) in the House, the Thirty-Two Hour Workweek Act, which would amend the Fair Labor Standards Act to reduce the standard workweek from 40 hours to 32, lowering the maximum hours threshold for overtime pay for non-exempt employees. Those exempt would include computer professionals, farmworkers, sales employees, and many other occupations. The proposal follows the United Auto Workers (UAW) strikes in the fall, where one of the labor demands was for a 32-hour workweek. You can read today's podcast⁠ ⁠⁠here⁠⁠⁠, our “Under the Radar” story ⁠here⁠ and today's “Have a nice day” story ⁠here⁠. You can watch our latest YouTube video, The Zionist Case for a Ceasefire, here. On Sunday, we released Episode 1 of our first ever limited podcast series: The Undecideds. We're following five voters — all Tangle readers — who are undecided about who they are going to vote for in the 2024 election. In Episode 1, we introduce you to those voters. Today's clickables: A couple of notes (0:54), Quick hits (2:01), Today's story (4:12), Right's take (7:20), Left's take (9:39), Isaac's take (13:20), Listener question (18:44), Under the Radar (21:29), Numbers (22:26), Have a nice day (23:41) You can subscribe to Tangle by clicking here or drop something in our tip jar by clicking here.  Last week, we released more tickets to our New York City event on April 17th, and they got gobbled up quickly. Our general admission tickets are now sold out; but we still have some VIP seats left for purchase. Get them here.  Tangle is looking for a part-time intern to work as an assistant to our YouTube and podcast producer. This is a part-time, paid position that would be ideal for a college student or recent college graduate looking to get real-world deadline experience in the industry. Applicants should have: Proficiency in Adobe Premiere — After Effects a plus. Minimum of one year of video editing (Adobe Premiere) Minimum of one year of audio editing and mixing (Any DAW) Good organizational and communication skills Understanding of composition and aesthetic choices Self-sufficiency in solving technical problems Proficiency in color grading and vertical video formatting (preferred, not required) To apply, email your resume and a few paragraphs about why you are applying to jon@readtangle.com and isaac@readtangle.com with the subject line "Editor opening" The job listing is posted here. Preference will be given to candidates in the greater Philadelphia area.  What do you think of the 32-hour workweek? Let us know! Our podcast is written by Isaac Saul and edited and engineered by Jon Lall. Music for the podcast was produced by Diet 75.  Our newsletter is edited by Managing Editor Ari Weitzman, Will Kaback, Bailey Saul, Sean Brady, and produced in conjunction with Tangle's social media manager Magdalena Bokowa, who also created our logo. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/tanglenews/message

The first child labor law in America went on the books almost 200 years ago, and federal labor protections were enshrined in the Fair Labor Standards Act nearly 100 years later in 1938. So almost a century after the passage of the FLSA, why are we seeing reports of children working in factories, slaughterhouses, and even at McDonald's? Meanwhile, state legislators are introducing bills across the country that further weaken child labor protections. Historian Beth English and Vox senior policy reporter Rachel Cohen explain. References: The Republican push to weaken child labor laws, explained | Vox Alone and Exploited, Migrant Children Work Brutal Jobs Across the U.S. | The New York Times 10-year-olds among hundreds of children found working at McDonald's restaurants | NBC News  Credits: Jonquilyn Hill, host Sofi LaLonde, producer Brandon McFarland, engineer A.M. Hall, editorial director of talk podcasts Want to support The Weeds? Please consider making a donation to Vox: bit.ly/givepodcasts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices