employment, labor, benefits and immigration law for … · 2013-11-08 · of compensation...

Mid-Year Workplace laW outlook:Supreme Court Wraps Up As Legislators and Enforcement Agencies Ramp Up

Congress, the regulatory agencies, and the courts have been busy with changes likely to affect work-place law. The Obama Administration also has been busy, seeking to fill a number of key regula-

tory positions, and has proposed FY 2010 budget increases – beyond those already in effect for the remainder of FY 2009 – for the Department of Labor, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commis-sion, and the National Labor Relations Board, among others. Several important pieces of legislation, including the Employee Free Choice Act, are making their way through Congress. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court – just concluding its 2008 term with a number of important labor and employment law decisions – will begin its 2009 term in October with a new Justice. Given the implications such changes have for employers, now is a good time to take stock as well as to look forward to what we may expect in the months ahead.

Department of Labor

nder the broad roof of the DOL, the Wage and Hour Division of the Employment Standards Administra-tion (responsible for enforcing Fair Labor Standards Act and Family and Medical Leave Act), the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, the Employee Benefits Security Administration (responsible

for enforcing COBRA and HIPAA), and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, among others, are being reshaped by the new Administration. Increased funding for the DOL through FY 2009 was ap-proved in March, and Labor Secretary Hilda Solis has requested $104.5 billion for FY 2010.

S t r a t e g i e sPREVENTIVE

EmPloymEnt, labor, bEnEfits and immigration law for EmPloyErs

Cont inued

Vo

lu

me 3

2,

Nu

mb

er 2

|

Se

co

Nd

Qu

ar

te

r 2

00

9

feature COVeraGe 1 - 8

U

www.jacksonlewis.com

2

EDitoriaL BoarD Roger S. Kaplan Mei Fung So Margaret R. Bryant This bulletin is published for clients of the firm to inform them of labor and employment develop-

ments. Space limitations prevent exhaustive treatment of matters highlighted. We will be pleased to provide additional details upon request and discuss with clients the effect of

these matters on their specific situations. | Copyright: © 2009 Jackson Lewis llp Reproduction in whole or in part by any means whatsoever is strictly prohibited without the advance

written permission of Jackson Lewis. | This Bulletin may be considered attorney advertising in some states. Furthermore, prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

PrEvEntivE stratEgiEs | second Quarter 2009 Jackson lewis llp

their policies and practices. Fresh from its record-setting monetary

recoveries in 2008, OFCCP is expected to further boost enforcement against systemic discrimination. It will emphasize outreach, training, and investigative techniques to evaluate compensation practices. Contractors should monitor compensation, especially for statistical indicators of potential discrimi-nation. Any suspect pay differences should be supported, or corrective action may be necessary.

Go to Jackson Lewis Online for Legal Updates, Webinars, and Special Reports on OFCCP and Wage and Hour Compliance. www.jacksonlewis.com

Workplace Privacy and Data Security

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) expands, enforces, and enhances the privacy and security safeguards required by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) for certain individually identifiable health

The Wage and Hour Division is expected to receive more than $277 mil-lion, a substantial increase over FY 2009 and enough to hire 288 more full-time employees. The OFCCP is expected to use its one-third increase in FY 2010 funding to develop a new case management system, hire additional compliance officers and other enforcement personnel, increase the number of compliance evaluations and complaint investigations, and bolster its enforcement strategies. The budget increases are neces-sary for the DOL’s enhanced investigation and enforcement efforts already underway at some agencies.

What Should Employers Expect from the Wage and Hour Division and oFCCP?

Both the Wage and Hour Division and the OFCCP are likely to increase their scrutiny of worker classification, overtime pay calcu-lations, family and medical leave practices, and record keeping. In anticipation of more compliance audits, employers should review

DOL Website Shows Proactive Posture

The DOL website provides a look at the ramped up enforcement and recruitment efforts currently underway. “DOL Online Opportunities Recruitment System,” or DOORS, recently listed over 400 job vacan-cies, and individuals can submit questions to “Ask Secretary Solis about the FY 2010 Budget.” Among recent questions and answers was the following exchange concerning enforcement activity at the OFCCP:

Q: What percentage of the budget will be used to implement new enforcement initiatives?

a: Basically, the entire increase of $23.6 million, and most of the 213 additional full-time employ-ees, will be directed toward strengthening the office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs’ overall enforcement posture. . . . over recent years, as a result of streamlined desk audit procedures, onsite reviews -- reviews in which compliance officers reviewed the personnel practices of federal contractors by visiting them on location -- have decreased by more than 50 percent.

Further, a significant percentage of the budget will support enforcement and outreach efforts related to compensation. Given the complexities of new procedures outlined in two Federal register notices address-ing interpretive Standards for Compensation Discrimination and Voluntary Guidelines for Self Evaluation of Compensation Practices, respectively, oFCCP will place additional emphasis on outreach and training, as well as improving the various approaches and investigative techniques used to evaluate compensation.

With an increased

chance for a compli-

ance audit, employers

should review policies

and practices, and

take remedial action

where necessary.

Please Note

to update contact information, or for any other request or com-ment regarding your complimentary sub-scription to Preventive Strategies, please send an email to [email protected], or postal mail to:

Jackson Lewis LLP 59 Maiden Lane 39th Floor New York, NY 10038

attn: Client Services

Please include the title of

this publication in all cor-

respondence.

information. Most businesses will be af-fected to some degree.

Many companies are responding to the emergence of federal and state data privacy and security regulations by developing safe-guards to protect personal data. Employers should take employee concerns regarding data privacy and security seriously, not only to help assure compliance, but also because adverse action taken against an employee who expresses concern about alleged data security deficiencies could be the basis for a whistleblower claim.

Go to Jackson Lewis Online for Legal Updates, Webinars, and Special Reports on Employee Benefits and Workplace Privacy. www.jacksonlewis.com

occupational Safety and Health

The Department of Labor’s budget request of $563.6 million for the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, including funding for over 200 additional full-time employees, signals the DOL’s renewed em-phasis on regulatory enforcement to address occupational hazards. In the past, OSHA has come under criticism for abandoning regulation and enforcement in favor of voluntary compliance. The Obama Admin-istration has been outspoken in its resolve

Jackson lewis llp PrEvEntivE stratEgiEs | second Quarter 2009

3

At the heart of every whistleblower lawsuit is the claim of retaliatory employer conduct. Such claims have increased at a steady pace, both at the EEOC, where retaliation accounted for 34% of all claims in FY 2008, and at the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, which handles the administrative procedure for whistleblower claims under the federal Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Whistleblowers may have sev-eral avenues for seeking redress for alleged retaliation. However, they may not be entitled to “two bites at the apple,” said the federal appeals court in Philadelphia in a first-of-its-kind ruling.

The court disallowed a former employee’s retaliation claim under federal and state EEO laws because she previously had attempted and failed to make the same claim under the SOX whistleblower provisions. The appeals court ruled the plaintiff could not re-litigate the same claim in a different proceeding. The only avenue of relief in the employee’s SOX proceeding was to appeal the decision of the administrative law judge according to the statutory process.

Tice v. Bristol-Myers Squibb, (3d Cir. Apr. 8, 2009).

Whistleblower Must Choose: SOX or EEOC

A number of thorny legal questions may arise in deciding how best to respond to concerns about the spread of the H1N1 influenza virus (or “swine flu”) in the workplace. Employers must consider not only federal law requirements but employee handbooks, manuals, and contracts (including bargaining agreements), and any applicable state or local laws.

Jackson Lewis resources on this subject include:

a r t i C L E S :

How Employers Should respond to the Swine Flu outbreakjacksonlewis.com/legalupdates/

article.cfm?aid=1700

Workplace FaQ’s Concerning Pandemic influenzajacksonlewis.com/legalupdates/article.cfm?aid=1704

J L W E B i N a r :

immunize Your Workplace with Proper Pandemic Planningjacksonlewis.com/events/webinars.cfm

WorkPlace coNcerN:

Pandemic Inf luenza

to return to issuing and enforcing standards and regulations.

Six new industry-specific National Emphasis Programs (NEPs) are in develop-ment, including one on record keeping, which will have the potential to reach all employers required to keep OSHA injury and illness logs. Other NEPs will affect chemical plants – process safety manage-ment; primary metals; flavorings and diacetyl; and oil and gas well drilling. Additionally, the agency is developing an NEP for occupational asthma.

New rulemaking on a standard for combustible dust underscores OSHA’s plan to ramp up enforcement and return to the regulatory process.

Go to Jackson Lewis Online for Legal Updates, Webinars, and Special Reports on Workplace Safety Compliance. www.jacksonlewis.com

Equal Employment opportunity Commission

he Obama Administration’s proposed budget for FY 2010 would give the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

approximately $367 million, $23 million over T

4


immigration

he Obama Administration’s fiscal year 2010 budget request for the Department of Home-land Security includes almost $2.9 billion for

Citizenship and Immigration Services. The increase will be used in part to expand the federal govern-ment’s E-Verify program for electronic employment verification, including the hiring of approximately 80 employees for a newly created monitoring and compliance office, according to CIS.

Meanwhile, the government has decided to postpone – for the fourth time – until September 8, 2009, implementation of the E-Verify require-ment for federal contractors. Although employers presently are not required to use E-Verify based on federal government contracts, those with locations in certain states or with state or local government contracts may be subject to state law require-ments mandating use of E-Verify. Thus, employers should review any state or local contracts and laws of the states in which they are located for possible E-Verify requirements.

Go to Jackson Lewis Online for Legal Updates on Global Immigration. www.jacksonlewis.com

Labor relations

he Obama Administration’s proposed budget for fiscal year 2010 includes $283.4 million for the National Labor T

current funding levels. Like other agencies, the Commission is seeking to hire additional personnel as charges increase and enforce-ment ramps up. In 2009, President Obama will have the opportunity to appoint two new members and to name a permanent chairper-son, in addition to filling the vacant General Counsel position.

With nationwide unemployment at 9.5%, the number of charges filed with the EEOC is likely to increase. In FY 2008, 95,000 charges were filed, an increase of 13,000 over 2007. The enactment in January of the Lilly Led-better Fair Pay Act, effective retroactively to May 28, 2007, is certain to have an impact on charge filings for discriminatory pay practices. Moreover, widespread reductions-in-force have contributed to a 29% increase in age-re-lated charges, the highest of all EEOC charge categories. EEOC litigation, which recovered more than $100 million in 2008, also is likely to increase.

In other recent activity, the EEOC has supplemented its 2007 guidance on prevent-ing discrimination against employees with caregiver responsibilities. Entitled, Employer Best Practices for Workers with Caregiving Responsibilities, the guide released this April covers a wide range of employment issues, from recruitment, retention and compensa-tion to flexible work arrangements, leave and removing job functions.

Go to Jackson Lewis Online for Legal Updates, Webinars, and Special Reports on Litigation and Litigation Avoidance. www.jacksonlewis.com

President Intends to Nominate Two NLRB Members

The NLRB quorum question may be nearing an end, at least for new cases. In April, President Obama announced his intention to nominate Democrats Craig Becker and Mark G. Pearce to fill two of the three vacant seats on the Board. Mr. Becker is an associate general counsel for the Service Employees International Union and the AFL-CIO. Mr. Pearce began his career as a Labor Board attorney, and worked in the regional office in Buffalo, NY, for 15 years before entering pri-vate practice in labor and employment law.

The appointees must be confirmed by the Senate. If confirmed, the two new members will join Chairman Wilma Liebman, a Democrat, and Member Peter Schaumber, a Republican, to create the first Democratic majority on the Board since 2001.

TClass-Wide Damages

in Systemic Discrimination Class

actions

Regardless of whether the Ninth Circuit upholds its 2007 decision in the historic Wal-Mart v. Dukes class action, the position staked out by the EEOC in an amicus brief filed with the fed-eral appeals court should give employers cause for concern. According to the EEOC, class-wide punitive damages can be determined by a jury in Title VII pattern or practice cases and back pay determinations may be made without individualized hearings when appropriate. If the Ninth Circuit or another court agrees with the EEOC, many employers could lose their abil-ity to defend individual employment decisions in large class actions with evidence of wrongdoing turning on company-wide statistics.

Jackson Lewis has pre-pared this Special Report to provide clients with a clear understanding of the EEOC’s position, as well as strategic advice regarding what employ-ers can do now to avoid costly and burdensome class action litigation and EEOC enforcement actions.

Go to Jackson Lewis

Online Webinars and Special Reports. www.jacksonlewis.com

Special RepoRt

available online:


5

More than 400 Labor

Board decisions issued

since January 1, 2008,

and any decisions

issued while the

Board still has only

two members,

may be at risk.

Relations Board, a $20.8 million increase from FY 2009. According to budget materi-als, 22,501 unfair labor practice cases and 3,400 representation cases were filed with the NLRB during FY 2008, and the Board con-ducted 2,085 initial representation elections.

Since January 1, 2008, three of the Board’s five seats have been vacant. During that time, the Board has adjudicated approximately 400 cases and transacted other business with only two members, resulting in a number of legal challenges to the Board’s authority. The U.S. Courts of Appeals for the First Circuit (Bos-ton), the Second Circuit (New York), and the Seventh Circuit (Chicago) upheld the Board’s ability to function with only two members. However, the D.C. Circuit held that decisions issued by a two-member Board were invalid for lack of at least a three-member quorum. Cases presenting similar issues are pending in the Third, Fourth, Eighth and Tenth Circuits. The decision of the Seventh Circuit is the subject of a request for review by the U.S. Supreme Court to resolve the issue.

The NLRB, still functioning with just two seated members, has announced that it will continue to issue decisions and rulings in unfair labor practice and representation cases. However, the decision of the D.C. Circuit is problematic, since any party adversely af-fected by a Board decision has the statutory

right to request review of that decision in the D.C. Circuit. Thus, the 400 Board decisions issued since January 1, 2008, and any deci-sions issued before at least one of the vacant seats is filled, may be at risk.

Meanwhile, the debate over the future of the Employee Free Choice Act contin-ues with both employer and employee groups waging vocal and visible campaigns. Although there has been talk of compro-mise, as of mid-June, there were no formal proposals modifying the original measure introduced in March (see, Employee Free Choice Act Re-introduced in Congress, at www.jacksonlewis.com).

Jackson Lewis will continue to monitor closely the developments with EFCA and to assist employer efforts to prepare for the likelihood that some form of EFCA will be enacted. Attorneys from Jackson Lewis have assisted the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in preparing a briefing book, The Employee Free Choice Act: Piercing the Rhetoric, available free of charge on the Chamber’s website: www.uschamber.com/publications/reports/0906efca.htm.

Go to Jackson Lewis Online for Legal Updates, Webinars, and Special Reports on Labor Relations and Preventive Practices. www.jacksonlewis.com

“Healthy Families Act” Would Require Paid Leave

Legislation that would require most employers to give employees paid time off has been introduced in Congress. the Healthy Families act (H.R. 2460/S. 1152) would require most employers to provide up to seven paid sick days each year, affecting most employers’ paid time off (PTO) policies. Employees could use paid sick time:

for their own physical or mental illness, injury, or medical condition;

to obtain medical care, including preventive care; and

to care for, or help obtain medical care for, a child, parent, spouse, or “any other individual related by blood or affinity whose close association with the employee is the equivalent of a family relationship.”

The Act specifies procedures for employee leave requests that “make a reasonable effort to schedule a period of paid sick time… in a manner that does not unduly disrupt the operations of the employer.” Employers would be entitled to medical certifications for absences of more than three consecutive days. Existing paid leave policies that are equiva-lent to, or more generous than, the proposed legislation would not have to change.

Employers would be required to post notices of employees’ rights and could be fined for willful posting viola-tions. The Department of Labor would have enforcement authority, and employees would have a private right of action to sue their employers for liquidated damages and equitable relief, as well as fees and costs.

■

■

■

HoW To STaY UNIoN Free

Fall 2009

Program Schedule

DALLAS, TX Sept. 30 - Oct. 1

ATLANTA, GAOct. 7 - 8

CHICAGO, ILOct. 27 - 28

LAS VEGAS, NV Nov. 17 - 18

For details:


[email protected]

SaVe THe DaTeS!

6


arbitration Provision in Union Contract May Bar Employee’s age Claims in Court

In one of the most important decisions for employers in the 2008 term, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a provision in a collective-bar-gaining agreement that “clearly and unmistak-ably” compels union members to arbitrate Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) claims is enforceable. The decision in 14 Penn Plaza LLC v. Pyett, No.07-581 (April 1, 2009), favors employers by limiting the remedies avail-able to union-represented employees claiming age discrimination. Employers with specifically tailored arbitration provisions in collective-bar-gaining agreements may be able to compel arbi-tration of federal age discrimination claims. The same rationale may be applicable to Title VII dis-crimination claims as well, based on the Court’s recognition of the similarities between the ADEA and Title VII.

Despite the significance of this decision, it will not affect all collective bargaining agreement arbitration provisions. The Court specifically reserved judgment on whether arbitration of statutory discrimination claims can be compelled if the agreement gives the union the ability to decide which claims go to arbitration. In a sub-sequent ruling, a federal trial court in New York found that a union-represented office cleaner alleging disability discrimination could not be compelled to submit her Americans with Disabili-ties Act claim to arbitration because the collective bargaining agreement gave the union control over

which claims to take to arbitration. Kravar v. Triangle Servs. Inc. (S.D.N.Y., May 19, 2009).

See www.jacksonlewis.com/legalupdates/ article.cfm?aid=1678.

White Firefighters Win against City in race Bias Case

On the last day of its 2008 term, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a long-awaited ruling in the “reverse discrimination” case against the City of New Haven, Connecticut. The Court decided in a 5-4 opinion that the City improperly dis-criminated on the basis of race when it refused to certify the results of a promotional test on which white and Hispanic firefighters outperformed their black colleagues. The City had argued that it disregarded the test results to avoid litigation claiming it violated the disparate impact prohibi-tion of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Ricci v. DeStefano, Nos. 07-1428 & 08-328 (June 29, 2009).

According to the Court, the City did not demonstrate a “strong basis in evidence” for invalidating the results of its promotional tests, even though based on the results and the City’s selection practices for promotion, none of the black firefighters who took the test would have qualified. “Fear of litigation alone cannot justify an employer’s reliance on race to the detriment of individuals who passed the examinations and qualified for promotions,” Justice Anthony Ken-nedy wrote for the majority, rejecting the City’s

“[R]ace-based action . . .

is impermissible under

Title VII unless the

employer can

demonstrate a strong

basis in evidence that,

had it not taken the

action, it would have

been liable under

the disparate-impact

statute.”

SupreMe court Wrap up

A review of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2008 term includes a number of decisions that affect the development of workplace law in the lower courts and employers’ practices and policies. What makes the close of this term somewhat unusual is that come October, when the 2009 term begins, a new justice will be on the bench to replace retiring Justice David Souter. President Obama’s nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in New York has focused attention on her judicial record in numerous labor and employment law cases, but her opinions cannot be categorized easily either as employee- or employer-friendly.

See “Supreme Court Nominee Sotomayor’s Record in Labor and Employment Law Cases Reveals Balanced Approach” at www.jacksonlewis.com/legalupdates/article.cfm?aid=1736.

argument. The Court established a “strong basis in evidence” standard to reconcile what the major-ity viewed as two competing provisions within Title VII prohibiting “disparate-treatment” on the one hand, and “disparate-impact” on the other. “Under Title VII, before an employer can engage in intentional discrimination for the asserted purpose of avoiding or remedying an uninten-tional disparate impact, the employer must have a strong basis in evidence to believe it will be subject to disparate-impact liability if it fails to take the race-conscious, discriminatory action,” the Court reasoned. The standard “leaves ample room for employers’ voluntary compliance efforts,” it said.

See www.jacksonlewis.com/legalupdates/article.cfm?aid=1773.

Employers Need Not adjust Pension Benefits for Pre-1979 Maternity Leave

The Court decided that an employer does not necessarily violate the Pregnancy Discrimina-tion Act when it calculates pension benefits using a seniority-based system that does not


accord full credit for time spent on maternity leave prior to Title VII’s ban on pregnancy discrimination. AT&T Corp. v. Hulteen, No. 07-543 (May 18, 2009).


title Vii anti-retaliation Covers responses to internal investigation

The Court ruled Title VII protects an employee from retaliation even when the employee merely reports discrimination in response to an employer’s questions during an internal investigation of discrimination or harassment complaints made by others. It is not necessary for the employee herself to come forward to initiate a report of discrimination or harass-ment to be protected against retaliation. Crawford v. Metropolitan Government of Nashville, No. 06-1595 (Jan. 26, 2009).


7

F M L a : revised regulations

The Family and Medical Leave Act regulations have undergone major changes.

On November 17, 2008, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) released revised FMLA regula-tions, detailed in more than 750 pages, clarify-ing FMLA rights and obligations for employ-ers and employees. The regulations address employee rights to leave for family and medical reasons, and include provisions for military family leave under FMLA Amendments enacted earlier this year.

Among other changes, the rules, which took effect on January 16, 2009, revise FMLA leave forms and proce-dures and enhance the remedies employees may seek for FMLA violations.

Go to Jackson Lewis

Online Webinars and Special Reports. www.jacksonlewis.com

Special RepoRt

available online:

Remembering To m Sc h n i T z l e r

Jackson Lewis LLP is saddened to report that Tom SchniTzler passed away peacefully at his home in Long Beach, New Jersey on June 28, 2009. Tom was hired by founders Louis Jackson and Robert Lewis and joined the Firm in its New York City offices on September 11, 1959. From 1964 until 2002, the Firm was known as Jackson Lewis Schnitzler & Krupman. In 1982, Tom helped to open the Firm’s office in White Plains, where he prac-ticed until his retirement in 2003.

Tom occupied a “corner office” at Jackson Lewis in more ways than one. He devoted his legal career to helping clients preserve their management rights. In all labor relations matters, he provided counsel and representation in a professional, ethical, and common sense manner, with a style at once aggressive yet gentlemanly. His partner of more than 30 years Patrick Vaccaro, chairman of Jackson Lewis, praised Tom as “a fine gentleman, a wonderful lawyer and partner and, most especially, for possessing more common sense than any lawyer I have ever met.”

Educated at St. John’s University in Queens, Tom remained active in educational life in New York City. He served as an advisor, counselor, teacher, friend and member of the Board of Trustees at Monroe College in the Bronx for over 40 years. In 1998 the College honored him by dedicating the Thomas P. Schnitzler Library at its Bronx campus.

Tom will be sorely missed by his partners, colleagues, friends, and family, including his wife Eileen and their five children and nine grandchildren.


Plaintiffs Must Prove age Discrimination is real Cause of adverse action

Rejecting the view of many lower courts, the Supreme Court determined, by a 5-4 vote, that under the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act, employees alleging disparate treatment must prove that age discrimination was the “but-for” cause of

8

Albany, NY Albuquerque, NM Atlanta, GA Birmingham, AL Boston, MA Chicago, IL Cleveland, OH Dallas, TX Denver, CO Detroit, MI Greenville, SC Hartford, CT Houston TX Jacksonville, FL Las Vegas, NV

Long Island, NY Los Angeles, CA Memphis, TN Miami, FL Minneapolis, MN Morristown, NJ New Orleans, LA New York, NY Omaha, NE Orange County, CA Orlando, FL Philadelphia, PA Phoenix, AZ Pittsburgh, PA

Portland, OR Portsmouth, NH Providence, RI Raleigh-Durham, NC Richmond, VA Sacramento, CA San Diego, CA San Francisco, CA Seattle, WA Stamford, CT Washington DC Region White Plains, NY

Sign Up

for Jackson Lewis Email alerts

Register online at http://myupdates. jacksonlewis.com

an adverse employment action in order to prevail. Therefore, to prove their case, it is no longer sufficient for plaintiffs to show at a minimum that age discrimination was merely a “motivating factor” or “mixed motive” in an adverse employment action. Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc., No. 08-441 (June 18, 2009).

See www.jacksonlewis.com/legalupdates/article.cfm?aid=1768.

States tighten Enforcement Efforts against Worker Misclassification

A number of states have tightened enforce-ment efforts against employers that misclas-sify workers as independent contractors instead of employees. Worker misclassifica-tion can result in liability for unpaid wages and payroll taxes, penalties, fines, and other consequences under labor and employment laws. The Internal Revenue Service has pub-lished guidelines for determining independent contractor status for business use in federal tax withholding (see Employers’ Supplemental Tax Guide for 2009, Publication 15-A, at www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p15a.pdf.

Colorado and Maryland recently have enacted laws specifically penalizing employers for misclassifying workers. In Colorado, employ-ers are subject to investigations by the Colo-

of the WorkplaceD e v e l o p i n g L a w

Labor relations

Additional information on worker misclassification is available online at jacksonlewis.com Legal Updates:

The Long Island Employer, Spring 2009: jacksonlewis.com/legalupdates/newsletters/pdf/247.pdf

New Legislation Affecting Colorado Employers: jacksonlewis.com/legalupdates/article.cfm?aid=1744

Maryland Enacts Law Targeting Employers Who Misclassify Workers as Independent Contractors: jacksonlewis.com/legalupdates/article.cfm?aid=1762

rado Department of Labor, payment of back taxes and interest, and fines of up to $25,000 per misclassified employee for willful and multiple violations, with possible debarment from state contracts for a period of two years. The Maryland law applies to employ-ers in construction and landscape services with different consequences for “improper” and “knowing” misclassification, ranging from restitution and full compliance to the addition of penalties of $5,000 per employee.

The New York Department of Labor has increased investigations of employers in certain targeted industries and where employers have been named in complaints or have filed a dispro-portionate number of 1099 tax forms.

In Ohio, the attorney general’s office has announced intensified investigation and exchange of data by the Department of Jobs and Family Services, the Department of Taxation, and the Bureau of Workers’ Compensation.

Worker misclassifica-

tion can result in

liability for unpaid

wages and payroll

taxes, penalties,

fines, and other

consequences under

labor and

employment laws.

employment, labor, benefits and immigration law for … · 2013-11-08 · of compensation...

Documents