Today the United States Supreme Court ruled that Section 3 of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is unconstitutional. The case, United States v. Windsor, 570 U.S. ____ (2013), involved the portion of DOMA that stated that the federal government will only recognize marriages between opposite-sex spouses for purposes of federal law.
Supreme Court
Who is the Supervisor? Supreme Court Resolves Long Simmering Question Under Title VII
By: Chuck Post
In Vance v. Ball State University, the Supreme Court clarified a long open question, “Who is a supervisor under Title VII?” The question is important because employers are directly responsible for employee harassment by a supervisor. In the case of worker harassment of a co-worker, however, employer liability is less direct.
Tangled is The Heart: U.S. Supreme Court Rejects “Mixed Motives” As A Basis For Retaliation Claims
By: Chuck Post
In University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar, the Supreme Court held that employees must show that “but for” the employer’s desire to retaliate, the employee would not have suffered an adverse action (demotion, termination, etc.) against him/her. Lower courts had been split over whether the “but for” standard was…
“Inside Sales Exemption” – Are Commissions Calculated When Earned or When Paid?
The Ninth Circuit has referred the Peabody v. Time Warner Cable case to the California Supreme Court to answer this question.
Under the commissioned salesperson exemption, or the “inside sales exemption” in Wage Orders 4 and 7 (ONLY) an employee is exempt from overtime if his or her earnings: 1) exceed one and one-half times the minimum wage; and 2) more than half of the employee’s compensation represents commissions. Under California’s minimum hourly wage of $8.00, an inside sales commissioned employee must earn at least $12.00 per hour to qualify for the exemption. Continue Reading “Inside Sales Exemption” – Are Commissions Calculated When Earned or When Paid?
California Pre-Employment Arbitration Agreement Ruled Unconscionable
Including arbitration provisions in employment agreements or employee handbooks is not a guaranteed way to avoid the courtroom. On January 3, 2012, the California Court of Appeal upheld a decision from the Sacramento County Superior Court holding that an arbitration provision contained in a pre-employment agreement was unconscionable, and, therefore, unenforceable.Continue Reading California Pre-Employment Arbitration Agreement Ruled Unconscionable