The DOL regulations require FMLA-covered employers to provide various notices to employees. The regulations do not dictate how all of the notices must be delivered. Most employers utilize hand-delivery or regular U.S. mail for most pre-leave notices (eligibility and pre-leave designations) and use U.S. mail almost exclusively for post-leave notices (i.e., when the employee is already out
Fifth Circuit Holds, in Issue of First Impression, that But-For Causation Applies to Claims Arising Under the Jury System Improvement Act
Both federal and Texas law prohibit discrimination against employees for participating in various types of jury service. Imagine an employer defending itself from the accusation that it terminated an employee because of her jury service and then looking across the courtroom to see the individuals who will most likely decide the merits of its case –a
Two Recent “Yawn” Employment Cases from the Texas Supreme Court
There have been two employment cases decided by the Texas Supreme Court in the last several months. However, because I expect them to have little impact on Texas jurisprudence, I have not been compelled to write about them before today. However, in the interest of keeping the blog up-to-date with each of the employment cases from the
Fifth Circuit Holds Confidential Information Policy Protecting Company Financial and Personnel Information Violates the NLRA
In an opinion likely effecting many Texas employers, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that an employer’s confidentiality policy that prohibited employees from disclosing all company financial and personnel information without a carve-out for employee wage information violated the National Labor Relations Act.
Flex Frac, a non-union employer, required all of its employees to sign the following confidentiality
Fifth Circuit Rejects Argument that Class Action Waivers in Arbitration Agreements Violate the NLRA
I first wrote about the NLRB’s decision that pre-dispute arbitration agreements waiving the right to assert claims as part of a class action violated federal labor law in January 2012 (post). Back then, I thought it was prudent for employers to wait for the result of the the inevitable appeal that would follow before
Fifth Circuit Confirms Use of Fluctuating Workweek Method of Overtime Calculation in Misclassification Case
In settlement negotiations and trial of FLSA overtime misclassification cases, there is usually a disagreement between the parties as to how the unpaid overtime should be calculated. Attorneys representing employees typically want overtime calculated using a 1.5 times the regular rate of pay for each overtime hour that was worked. Attorneys representing companies typically want to utilize
Court Holds that Reasonableness of Physician Buy-Out Clauses in Noncompetition Agreements Can be Challenged Even When Parties Previously Agreed to Amount
I have written several posts outlining the unique requirements that employers must include to create a valid noncompeteition agreement with a physician. (posts here and here). A recent case from the Beaumont Court of Appeals holds that even when a physician noncompetition agreement contains a reasonable buy-out clause, the employer may still have to arbitrate the
Fifth Circuit Holds that Employee’s Internal Complaints of Securities Violations Do Not Qualify for Dodd-Frank Whistleblower Protection
In a recent opinion of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, the federal appellate court held that a former employee terminated after making internal complaints to his employer about possible securities violations, but who never made complaints to the S.E.C., was not a whistleblower under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010
U.S. Supreme Court Adopts “But For” Causation Standard for Title VII Retaliation Cases
In a case appealed from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a plaintiff in a Title VII retaliation case may prevail only when he shows that he would not have suffered an adverse employment action “but for” his engaging in protected activity.
In the first retaliation case in several years
U.S. Supreme Court Adopts Objective Test for Determining Title VII Supervisor Status
The U.S. Supreme Court adopted an objective test for determining an employee’s Title VII “supervisory status” in Vance v. Ball State University. The question in Vance was what level of authority must an individual have to qualify as a “supervisor” for purposes of Title VII vicarious liability. This is an important issue because the employee’s status