As explained in a prior blog post, on January 21, 2025, President Trump signed Executive Order 14173 (“Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity”) (the “EO”), establishing new requirements for federal contractors and grant recipients to agree that their compliance with federal anti-discrimination laws is “material to the government’s payment decisions” for purposes of the False Claims Act (“FCA”) and to certify that they do not operate any “programs promoting DEI that violate any applicable Federal anti-discrimination laws.”  On February 21, a federal judge in the District of Maryland granted a preliminary injunction to block these and other portions of the EO, including potential FCA enforcement actions based on the certification provision, as well as a provision of Executive Order 14151 (“Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing”).Continue Reading Federal Appeals Court Reinstates Provisions of DEI Executive Orders

On January 21, 2025, President Trump issued the Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity Executive Order (the “EO”), which revokes Executive Order 11246, a 60-year-old Civil Rights-era directive that prohibited federal contractors from discriminating on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or national origin, and required federal contractors to take affirmative action to provide equal opportunity in employment. The EO seeks to “end[] illegal preferences and discrimination” and “promote individual initiative, excellence, and hard work” by ending the use of “dangerous, demeaning, and immoral race- and sex-based preferences under the guise of so-called ‘diversity, equity, and inclusion’ (DEI) or ‘diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility’ (DEIA)” programs. The EO does so by prescribing required contract provisions for federal contracts and by requiring specific reports from the heads of federal agencies, including identification of private entities for potential investigation, as described further below. The provisions of the EO do not apply to federal or private sector employment and contracting preferences for veterans. Federal contractors and grant recipients have until April 21, 2025 to comply with the EO’s revocation of affirmative action requirements. However, federal contractors, subcontractors, and grant recipients may become subject to the new contract provision requirements imposed by the EO without delay.1Continue Reading President Trump’s “Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity” Executive Order Targets Federal Contractors and the Private Sector

Five states have joined the growing number of states with pay transparency laws requiring employers to include compensation information in job postings.  An Illinois law and a Minnesota law took effect on January 1, 2025, and New Jersey, Vermont, and Massachusetts laws will take effect later this year.  While the new laws differ in their specific requirements, they generally mirror pay transparency statutes passed in recent years in other states, including California, Colorado, and New York, that require employers to disclose pay ranges, and sometimes benefits information and other compensation, in job postings.  Continue Reading New Pay Transparency Laws Effective in 2025

Pursuant to the New York Paid Prenatal Leave Law (the “PPL Law”), beginning on January 1, 2025, New York employers must provide employees with 20 hours of paid leave for prenatal healthcare service appointments during their pregnancy or related to pregnancy (“Paid Prenatal Leave”) in a 52-week period. The PPL Law amends the New York State Sick Leave Law.Continue Reading New York Employers Required to Provide Paid Prenatal Leave

As discussed in our prior post, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) issued a final rule earlier this year that increased the salary thresholds required to classify certain employees as exempt from overtime pay requirements under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).  On November 15, 2024, the federal district court for the Eastern District of Texas blocked the rule nationwide just weeks before the second phase of the salary threshold increases were scheduled to take effect.  The decision reinstates the salary thresholds in effect prior to the DOL’s 2024 rule, which represent a nearly 65% decrease from the thresholds set in the 2024 rule. Continue Reading Federal District Court Vacates Biden’s DOL Overtime Rule

California Governor Gavin Newsom recently signed into law a number of employment-related assembly bills (“AB”) and senate bills (“SB”), once again altering the landscape of workplace regulation in California.  With several key new laws taking effect as soon as January 1, 2025, now is the time for employers to prepare for compliance.Continue Reading It’s That Time Again: New California Workplace Laws for 2025

National Labor Relations Board General Counsel (“GC”) Jennifer Abruzzo recently issued Memorandum GC 25-01 (“Memorandum”), suggesting new remedies for non-competes found to violate the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”) and proposing that the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) presume “stay-or-pay” provisions to be unlawful.  Although the Memorandum is not binding law, employers should expect GC Abruzzo to direct the NLRB’s regional offices to bring complaints and seek remedies consistent with the Memorandum.  The NLRA generally only extends protections to nonsupervisory and nonmanagerial employees, and therefore the Memorandum is not applicable to non-compete or stay-or-pay provisions for employees who are supervisors or managers under the NLRA. Continue Reading NLRB General Counsel: “Make-Whole Relief” for Non-Competes and No More “Stay-or-Pay”

With Election Day just weeks away, employers should quickly brush up on laws that permit employees to take time off to vote.  There is no federal law permitting time off to vote, but a majority of states and the District of Columbia have some form of voting leave law, with variations regarding the amount of time off, whether the leave must be paid, and notice and other requirements.  Here’s an overview of what to look out for:Continue Reading Is Your Workplace Election Ready?  Voting Leave Laws Across the States

On Friday, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed SB 399, the “California Worker Freedom from Employer Intimidation Act” (the “Act”) that should be of interest to any company with employees in the state. The Act, which takes effect on January 1, 2025, adds a new section to the California Labor Code to prohibit employers from taking or threatening adverse employment action against an employee because the employee refuses to attend employer meetings about, or to participate in, receive, or listen to, any communications about the employer’s opinion on religious or political matters. The law is similar to, but broader than, laws in several other states that attempt to decrease the influence of “captive audience” meetings communicating an employer’s political or religious opinions.Continue Reading California Joins Growing List of States Prohibiting Employer Action Against Employees Who Refuse Political or Religious Communications

On September 9, 2024, the SEC announced settled enforcement actions against seven companies for violating the SEC’s whistleblower rules.[1]  Specifically, the SEC alleged that the companies had provisions in various kinds of agreements with employees, including employment, separation, and settlement agreements, that purport to restrict, and thereby could potentially discourage, employees and other signatories from reporting information to government investigators or participating in a whistleblower award.Continue Reading SEC Enforcement Sweep Reaffirms Focus on Anti-Whistleblower Provisions in Employee Agreements