Robert D. Kilgore Direct: (210) 819-2904 rkilgore @laborlawyers
description
Transcript of Robert D. Kilgore Direct: (210) 819-2904 rkilgore @laborlawyers
1
©Copyright 2013All rights Reserved
Robert D. KilgoreDirect: (210) 819-2904
www.laborlawyers.com
Presented by:
Listening to the Supremes:2013 Employment Law Update
Atlanta · Boston · Charlotte · Chicago · Cleveland · Columbia · Columbus · Dallas · Denver · Fort Lauderdale · Houston
Irvine · Kansas City · Las Vegas · Los Angeles · Louisville · Memphis · New England · New Jersey · New Orleans Orlando · Philadelphia · Phoenix · Portland · San Diego · San Francisco · Tampa · Washington, DC
2
©Copyright 2013All rights Reserved
Where Are We Now?
• U.S. Supreme Court was busy• Gridlock did not prevent more regulation• Enforcement strategies became paramount• Regulators breathed new life into existing laws• Agencies reinvented themselves to stay viable • Rulemaking predominated over legislation
www.laborlawyers.com ●Phone (210) 227-5434
(210) 227-5434
3
©Copyright 2013All rights Reserved
The EEOC’s New Agenda
www.laborlawyers.com ●Phone (210) 227-5434
(210) 227-5434
4
©Copyright 2013All rights Reserved
EEOC Litigation
• 99,412 charges in FY 2012 - largest number ever• Pursued 580 systemic investigations• 122 lawsuits filed in FY 2012• $365 million in damages
www.laborlawyers.com ●Phon (210) 227-5434 e
5
©Copyright 2013All rights Reserved
What We Are Seeing
• More investigators with less experience• More aggressive tactics• Closer scrutiny of position statements and documentation• Investigators shifting burden of proof to employer• Increased demand for on-sites
www.laborlawyers.com ●Phone (210) 227-5434
6
©Copyright 2013All rights Reserved
2013-14 Strategic Enforcement Plan
• Eliminate systemic barriers in recruitment and hiring• Protect immigrant, migrant, and other vulnerable workers• Coverage of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender
(“emerging and developing issues”)• Equal pay laws• Preserving access to the legal system• Systemic investigations to address workplace
harassment
www.laborlawyers.com ●Phone (210) 227-5434
7
©Copyright 2013All rights Reserved
Systemic Investigations
Targeted areas for systemic investigations:• Leave/termination policies• “English only”/proficiency rules• Employment tests• Criminal background/credit checks
www.laborlawyers.com ●Phone (210) 227-5434
8
©Copyright 2013All rights Reserved
How Do You Know You’re On Their Systemic Radar?
Investigator asks questions about: • Policies or selection criteria to locations beyond the one
referenced in Charge• Data involving individuals or positions beyond those
specified in Charge• Pre-employment test “validation studies” • How selection criterion is relevant to job performance• HR database information
www.laborlawyers.com ●Phone (210) 227-5434
9
©Copyright 2013All rights Reserved
More Aggressive Even When Non-Systemic
• Demanding proof of notice to employees of job expectations and any performance problems
• Demanding evidence as to why one employee was selected over another
www.laborlawyers.com ●Phone (210) 227-5434
(210) 227-5434 (210) 227-5434
10
©Copyright 2013All rights Reserved
Arrest and Conviction Records
• EEOC investigative strategy targeting pre-hire selection criteria impacting minorities
• Pepsi reached a $3 million settlement with the EEOC for using criminal background checks to screen applicants
• Data suggests criminal background checks have disproportionate impact on African-Americans & Hispanics
www.laborlawyers.com ● Phone (210) 227-5434
11
©Copyright 2013All rights Reserved
Arrest and Conviction Records
• On April 25, 2012 EEOC issued “Enforcement Guidance”• Part of EEOC strategy targeting pre-hire selection criteria• Criminal background checks are under particular scrutiny
www.laborlawyers.com ●Phone (210) 227-5434
12
©Copyright 2013All rights Reserved
New Guidance
• Must make an individualized assessment• Consider many factors:
– Nature and gravity of offense– Time passed since conviction/sentence completion– Age at time of offense; age now– Rehabilitation efforts– Facts surrounding the offense– Number of convictions and offenses
www.laborlawyers.com ●Phone (210) 227-5434
13
©Copyright 2013All rights Reserved
New Guidance
• Consider many factors (cont’d):– Has person performed same type of work, post-
conviction, with no criminal conduct– Employment history before and after the offense– Additional training/education– Character references– Relevance of conviction to job duties
• Need background check policy and procedure that allows individualized assessment
www.laborlawyers.com ●Phone (210) 227-5434
14
©Copyright 2013All rights Reserved
Arrest and Conviction Records
www.laborlawyers.com ●Phone (210) 227-5434
Some push back on EEOC? Attorneys General from nine states send letter to EEOC
July 24, 2013 objecting to its enforcement efforts in
connection with criminal background checks in hiring.
15
©Copyright 2013All rights Reserved
DOL Update
• New Secretary of Labor Thomas Perez• “Labor Department will be a tough labor law enforcer and
pursue the kind of litigation that yielded a record $280 million in back wages for workers in 2012.”
• “Direct relationship" between the economic security of middle-class workers and organized labor.
• Endorses immigration reform and increased minimum wage.
www.laborlawyers.com ● Phone (404) 231-1400
16
©Copyright 2013All rights Reserved
2012-13 Supreme Court Term
• Six significant employment cases decided this past term• The good news: employers go 6-for-6• The not-so-good news: some of the decisions were
razor thin• Decisions in the next few years, before Justice Kennedy
retires, will be key
www.laborlawyers.com ● Phone (210) 227-5434
17
©Copyright 2013All rights Reserved
2012-13 Supreme Court Term
• Title VII– University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v.
Nassar• Makes it more difficult for employees to win
retaliation claims• Employees must show that their protected activity
was “but for” cause of adverse action• No “motivating factor” standard applied as in
discrimination cases
www.laborlawyers.com ● Phone (210) 227-5434
18
©Copyright 2013All rights Reserved
2012-13 Supreme Court Term
• Title VII– Vance v. Ball State Univ.
• Follow up to Farragher/Ellerth• Who is a supervisor for purposes of determining
whether affirmative defense applies?• Court: only those with authority to make significant
changes in employee’s status (like hiring, firing, demotion, reassignment)
• EEOC more expansive definition rejected
www.laborlawyers.com ● Phone (210) 227-5434
19
©Copyright 2013All rights Reserved
2012-13 Supreme Court Term
• Class Actions– Genesis Health Care Corp. v. Symczyk
• Addressed collective action “pick-off” tactic• Prior to others joining claim as “opt-ins,” employer
in Genesis offered to pay sole named plaintiff the full amount claimed
• Employer: this makes the claim moot. So no need for collective action.
• Court: the employer is correct. No one left with person interest in outcome.
www.laborlawyers.com ● Phone (210) 227-5434
20
©Copyright 2013All rights Reserved
2012-13 Supreme Court Term
• Class Actions– Comcast Corp. v. Behrend
• Court: plaintiffs who want to bring class actions must prove at certification stage that damages are measurable on a class-wide basis
• Must show that there is reliable and admissible evidence of common injury and damages on a class-wide basis before class can be certified
• Should limit number of class actions filed
www.laborlawyers.com ● Phone (210) 227-5434
21
©Copyright 2013All rights Reserved
2012-13 Supreme Court Term
• Arbitration– American Express v. Italian Colors Restaurant
• Not an employment case, but one with big impact on them
• Arbitration agreements with class waivers are permitted.
• Court requires agreement be enforced as written• Result: each aggrieved employee would have to
bring own arbitration claim
www.laborlawyers.com ● Phone (210) 227-5434
22
©Copyright 2013All rights Reserved
2012-13 Supreme Court Term
• Arbitration– Oxford Health Plans LLC v. Sutter
• Arbitrator in proceeding below permitted class-wide arbitration pursuant to clear language of agreement
• Why is this a win for employers? – Focus on actual language of the agreement
strengthens agreements– Warning to lowers courts not to interfere with
arbitration agreements
www.laborlawyers.com ● Phone (210) 227-5434
23
©Copyright 2013All rights Reserved
2012-13 Supreme Court Term
• DOMA– U.S. v. Windsor
• Portion of Defense of Marriage Act establishing federal definition of marriage held to be unconstitutional
• Does not force states to legalize gay marriage• Wait-and-see: May impact the way employers
treat same-sex couples under federal statutes governing family leave, employee benefits, taxes, etc.
www.laborlawyers.com ● Phone (210) 227-5434
24
©Copyright 2013All rights Reserved
Final Questions?
www.laborlawyers.com ● Phone (210) 227-5434
25
©Copyright 2013All rights Reserved
Thank you!
Robert D. KilgoreDirect: (210) 819-2904
www.laborlawyers.com ● Phone (210) 227-5434