About Us  |  About IntelliConnect®  |  Contact Us


Subscribe to the Employment Law Daily RSS Subscribe

AmEx denied motion to dismiss FLSA collective action claims of call center employees

April 24th, 2014

By Ronald Miller, J.D. Call center employees who alleged that their employer violated the FLSA by failing to pay overtime for pre-shift work, and by failing to pay for work performed during unpaid meal periods, stated a plausible claim that they and other employees were subject to a common plan or policy that violated the […]

Applicant unlawfully regarded as disabled after disclosing prior back surgery; no individualized assessment made

April 24th, 2014

By Brandi O. Brown, J.D. A process engineer who received a job offer conditioned on a medical screening, which was later rescinded after he revealed that he previously had back surgery and was unable to provide the required release/restriction information from his back surgeon, was regarded as disabled by the employer as a matter of […]

Telecommuting may be reasonable accommodation for employee with IBS; court cites “greatly expanded” class of jobs amenable to telework

April 24th, 2014

By Lisa Milam-Perez, J.D. A telecommuting arrangement could be a reasonable accommodation for an employee suffering from irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), a divided Sixth Circuit panel held, reviving the EEOC’s ADA claims brought on behalf of a Ford Motor employee who was terminated shortly after requesting to work from home a few days each week. […]

UAW drops challenge to VW election, pushes for congressional inquiry into political “threats”

April 23rd, 2014

By Pamela Wolf, J.D, In a surprising move on Monday, April 21, the UAW announced that it is withdrawing its NLRB objections challenging the controversial election held at the Volkswagen plant in Chattanooga, Tennessee in February. The UAW was defeated in a 712-626 vote. The union’s withdrawal of its objections puts an end to the […]

Connecticut law preempted by FLSA; employee not entitled to compensation for commuting time

April 23rd, 2014

By Ronald Miller, J.D. Because state regulations (Regs. Conn. State Agencies Sec. 31-60-10) as applied to the facts of this case conferred lesser benefits on employees than those afforded by the FLSA, the Connecticut Supreme Court concluded that federal preemption applied so that an employee was not entitled to compensation for his commuting time. While […]