Court authorizes employee-by-employee safety penaltiesBy Michael R. LiedOctober 2010Recent changes to OSHA clarify that an employer who fails to provide its employees with respirators or workplace training faces not just one violation, but violations for each employee affected.
Employer’s media policy violates labor lawBy Michael R. LiedJuly 2010An examination of Trump Marina Associates, LLC, in which an employer was found to have violated the National Labor Relations Act by maintaining and enforcing unlawfully broad rules regarding employees and their dealings with the media.
Headquarters’ headaches—Extraterritoriality and the courtsBy Douglas A. Darch & Miriam GeraghtyJanuary 2010The mobility of workers and the dispersion of employment sites has generated a new issue for employers—which state’s law controls an employment relationship and in which state may an aggrieved employee file suit against his or her employer when the employer conducts business in multiple states.
Parley—Settlement or something else?By Ambrose V. McCallOctober 2010When negotiating a settlement, what terms bind the parties, and what later interpretations produce non-binding “guidelines,” or something even less forceful?
Return-to-work evaluation is medical exam under ADABy Michael R. LiedApril 2010Employers intending to use a return-to-work examination must determine whether the EEOC's seven factors suggest that the examination is in fact a medical examination. If so, the examination must be justified as job related, and backed by business necessity.
Union indemnifies employer for pension withdrawal liabilityBy Michael R. LiedJanuary 2010Pittsburgh Mack Sales & Service, Inc. v. International Union of Operating Engineers, Local Union No. 66, 580 F.3d 185 (3d Cir. 2990) involved the unusual situation in which a union agreed to partially indemnify the employer for pension contributions.