Photo of Lindsay Burke

Lindsay Burke

Lindsay Burke co-chairs the firm’s Employment Practice Group and regularly advises U.S., international, and multinational employers on employee management and culture issues and international HR compliance. She is a key member of the firm's Institutional Culture and Social Responsibility practice, working together with white collar colleagues to conduct culture assessments, internal investigations of executive misconduct, and civil rights and racial equity audits and assessments. Lindsay has been at the forefront of the changing workplace issues impacting employers in the U.S. in the last decade, including #MeToo, Covid-19, and the renewed focus on diversity, equity, and inclusion. She frequently advises employers in relation to their processes and procedures for investigating complaints of discrimination, harassment, and retaliation and trains executive teams and board members on culture risk and the lawful implementation of DEI programs.

Lindsay also guides employers through the process of hiring and terminating employees and managing their performance, including the drafting and review of employment agreements, restrictive covenant agreements, separation agreements, performance plans, and key employee policies and handbooks. She provides practical advice against the backdrop of the web of state and federal employment laws, such as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Equal Pay Act, the Family and Medical Leave Act, the Fair Labor Standards Act, and the False Claims Act, with the objective of minimizing the risk of employee litigation. When litigation looms, Lindsay relies on her experience as an employment litigator to offer employers strategic advice and assistance in responding to demand letters and agency charges.

Lindsay works frequently with the firm’s privacy, employee benefits and executive compensation, corporate, government contracts, and cybersecurity practice groups to ensure that all potential employment issues are addressed in matters handled by these groups. She also regularly provides U.S. employment law training, support, and assistance to start-ups, non-profits, and foreign parent companies opening affiliates in the U.S.

Contact:Read more about Lindsay BurkeEmail

Effective March 12, 2021, all public and private employers in New York must provide each employee with up to four hours of paid leave to obtain a COVID-19 vaccine injection.  The new law, which took effect immediately after being signed by Governor Cuomo, adds a new Section 196-c to the New York Labor Law and Section 159-c to the New York Civil Service Law.

Employees are entitled to paid leave, at their regular rate of pay, for a “sufficient period of time, not to exceed four hours per vaccine injection,” unless the employee is entitled to receive a greater number of hours under an existing employer policy or collective bargaining agreement.  Accordingly, employees who must take two doses of a COVID-19 vaccine are entitled to take up to eight hours (i.e., four hours per injection) of leave.  The paid leave provision expires on December 31, 2022.Continue Reading New York Employers Now Required to Provide Paid Leave to Take COVID-19 Vaccine

New York State’s new paid sick leave law (“NYSSL”) took effect on September 30, 2020, requiring employers to allow employees to begin accruing paid sick leave benefits immediately.  Employees may use their accrued leave under the NYSSL starting January 1, 2021.  In response to its state law counterpart, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio has signed into law certain amendments to the existing NYC Paid Safe and Sick Leave Law (“NYCPSL”), also known as the Earned Sick and Safe Time Act, to align the NYCPSL with the NYSSL.

As discussed below, the NYSSL and NYCPSL impose similar paid sick leave requirements on employers, though the amendments to the NYCPSL expand employers’ obligations and strengthen New York City’s enforcement mechanisms.Continue Reading New York Employees May Begin Using New Paid Sick Leave Benefits on January 1, 2021

On September 11, 2020, the U.S. Department of Labor (“DOL”) issued revised regulations to clarify certain rights and employer responsibilities under the paid sick leave and expanded family and medical leave provisions of the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (“FFCRA”).  The revisions were made in response to a recent decision of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (“SDNY”), which invalidated certain provisions of the FFCRA regulations.

The FFCRA, which we discussed here, requires employers with fewer than 500 employees to provide emergency paid sick leave (“EPSL”) and emergency Family and Medical Leave Act leave (“EFMLA”) to employees who meet certain COVID-19-related conditions.  DOL issued regulations implementing the FFCRA on April 1, 2020.Continue Reading DOL Revises FFCRA Regulations in Response to Federal Court Decision Invalidating Parts of the FFCRA

A New York federal district court judge has struck down significant portions of the U.S. Department of Labor’s (“DOL”) joint employer rule, which went into effect earlier this year.  As a result of this ruling, certain companies may be more likely to be deemed joint employers and exposed to liability for wage and hour violations under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”).

As we described here, in March 2020, a final rule issued by DOL went into effect implementing a four-factor test for determining whether more than one entity may be considered an individual’s employer under the FLSA.  The new test shifted the existing rule’s focus on the “economic realities” of the alleged employer/employee relationship to a narrower inquiry regarding whether the alleged employer actually exercised control over the alleged employment relationship.

The District Court for the Southern District of New York has now held that DOL’s final joint employer rule violated the Administrative Procedures Act for two reasons.  First, the court found that the rule contradicted the text of the FLSA because it ignored relevant concepts defined in the statute, such as the definitions of “employ” and “employee,” and that DOL had erroneously applied different standards for “primary” and “joint” employment when no such distinction exists in the FLSA itself.  Second, the court found that DOL’s reasoning for the rule change was arbitrary, capricious, and not supported by adequate evidence.Continue Reading Federal District Court Strikes Down DOL Joint Employer Rule

As the COVID-19 public health crisis continues, businesses are dealing with unprecedented disruptions to operations and workforce stability. Most employers undoubtedly want to assist their employees during this uncertain time, but they are struggling to balance the cost of maintaining their workforce with shrinking profits. The frequent result of such a balancing act is a mass layoff. While such a reduction in workforce may be inevitable, below are options that employers can consider to try to avoid that outcome. For all of these alternatives, employers should be careful to apply any changes consistently across the workforce to avoid claims of inequity or discrimination.
Continue Reading Ten Ways to Avoid Layoffs During the COVID-19 Pandemic

The U.S. Department of Labor (“DOL”) has published a final rule, which takes effect on March 16, 2020, outlining the new four-factor approach DOL will use to determine whether, under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), a business is a “joint employer” of another company’s employees and thus jointly and severally liable for wage and hour obligations.  The new rule comes as good news for employers because it establishes a concrete and narrow standard for determining joint employer status and is expected to provide clearer guidance to federal courts making joint employer determinations.

The final rule represents the first time in 60 years that DOL has issued a joint employer rule, although over the decades it has issued guidance both expanding and contracting the scope of the definition and potential liability.  Furthermore, the rule is consistent with a series of actions that DOL, under the Trump administration, has taken to rescind the previously broader definition of “joint employer” under the Obama administration (including its June 7, 2017 withdrawal of employee-friendly Administrator’s Interpretation guidance documents from 2015 and 2016).Continue Reading DOL Issues Final “Joint Employer” Rule

The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) has announced a final rule that will increase access to overtime pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) for approximately 1.3 million workers.  The final rule, which comes six months after DOL published a proposed rule in March, is the latest development in a years-long process by DOL, spanning the Obama Administration and the Trump Administration, to modify FLSA overtime regulations.  The new rule takes effect on January 1, 2020, giving employers just a narrow window to assess the rule’s impact on their operations.  The final rule is available here.  DOL has also published a fact sheet that provides an overview of the final rule, available here.
Continue Reading DOL Publishes Final Rule Expanding Overtime Protections

Following two years of anticipation, after a similar but more aggressive rule was proposed by President Obama’s administration and then squashed by federal courts in Texas, the Department of Labor (DOL) has issued the long-awaited Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that, if enacted, would expand access to overtime pay for certain employees under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).  DOL estimates that this change could expand overtime eligibility for over one million American workers, about 3.7 million fewer than would have been impacted under the Obama proposal.  The proposed rule is available here.
Continue Reading DOL Publishes Proposal to Expand Overtime Protections

The Supreme Court put to rest years of uncertainty regarding the enforceability of class action waivers for employees when it decided Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis, 582 U.S. ___ (2018) on May 21.  In a 5-4 decision, the majority held that employers do not violate the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) or the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) by requiring employees to sign arbitration agreements that waive their rights to bring class action suits.  While the Supreme Court’s decision focused on class action waivers in the context of arbitration agreements, its holding could be extrapolated to uphold employee class action waivers included in any agreement between an employer and employee.
Continue Reading SCOTUS Upholds Employee Class Action Waivers in Epic Systems

Part of Our Series on the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017

The Tax Cuts & Jobs Act of 2017 adds a new provision to the Code, section 162(q), that eliminates deductions for settlement payments related to sexual harassment or sexual abuse “if such settlement or payment is subject…
Continue Reading No Tax Deductions for Sexual Harassment Settlements with Non-Disclosure Agreements