On March 19, 2025, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) released two “technical assistance” documents titled, “What You Should Know About DEI-Related Discrimination at Work” and “What To Do If You Experience Discrimination Related to DEI at Work” (“technical assistance”). The technical assistance follows President Trump’s issuance of Executive Order 14173 (“Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity”) on January 21, 2025, in which the president called for “ending illegal discrimination and preferences, including DEI” in the private sector. The EEOC and Department of Justice announced in a press release that the purpose of the technical assistance is “to help educate the public about how well-established civil rights rules apply to employment policies, programs, and practices—including those labeled or framed as ‘DEI.’”Continue Reading EEOC Technical Assistance: “What You Should Know About DEI-Related Discrimination at Work”
Federal Appeals Court Reinstates Provisions of DEI Executive Orders
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
President Trump’s “Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity” Executive Order Targets Federal Contractors and the Private Sector
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
New Pay Transparency Laws Effective in 2025
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
New York Employers Required to Provide Paid Prenatal Leave
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
Federal District Court Vacates Biden’s DOL Overtime Rule
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
NLRB General Counsel: “Make-Whole Relief” for Non-Competes and No More “Stay-or-Pay”
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”
Is Your Workplace Election Ready? Voting Leave Laws Across the States
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
Texas District Court Prohibits the FTC from Enforcing Its Non-Compete Ban Nationwide
Nationwide Injunction
On August 20, 2024, Judge Ada Brown of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas granted summary judgment for the plaintiffs in Ryan LLC v. FTC, preventing the FTC from enforcing its proposed rule banning almost all non-compete clauses in employer agreements. (Click here for the opinion.) The rationale for Judge Brown’s decision was consistent with her prior ruling on plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction (described here): the FTC does not have substantive competition-related rulemaking authority and the proposed non-compete rule was arbitrary and capricious. However, unlike Judge Brown’s preliminary injunction order, which was limited to the named plaintiffs, her summary judgment order states that the proposed rule “shall not be enforced or otherwise take effect on September 4, 2024, or thereafter.” Applying the plain text of § 706(2) of the APA, Judge Brown held that the proper remedy after concluding that the non-compete rule was in excess of the FTC’s statutory authority and arbitrary and capricious was to “set aside” the rule. According to the opinion, “setting aside agency action under § 706 has ‘nationwide effect,’ is ‘not party-restricted,’ and ‘affects persons in all judicial districts equally.” As a result, the order prohibits the FTC from enforcing the proposed non-compete rule on a nationwide basis.Continue Reading Texas District Court Prohibits the FTC from Enforcing Its Non-Compete Ban Nationwide
DOL Issues Final Rule Expanding Overtime Eligibility
On April 23, 2024, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) announced a final rule that increases the salary thresholds required to classify certain employees as exempt from overtime pay requirements under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The final rule, applicable to employees who otherwise satisfy the “white-collar” (bona fide executive, administrative, and professional) and “highly compensated” exemptions, is similar to the proposed rule DOL issued last August, although the salary thresholds in the final rule have been increased to align with the latest Census salary data.
The final rule represents a sharp increase—approximately 65%—from the current salary thresholds implemented in 2019 under the Trump Administration. The rule is scheduled to take effect in two phases, with the first phase effective July 1, 2024 and the second on January 1, 2025. Thus, employers have only a small window to determine how the rule will impact their operations and make any necessary adjustments.Continue Reading DOL Issues Final Rule Expanding Overtime Eligibility