Special thanks to co-presenters Elizabeth Ebersole, Barbara Klementz, Dionna Shear, Amanda Cohen, Benjamin Ho, Jennifer Bernardo, Kaitlin Thompson, Marredia Crawford (Director, ID&E, Americas), Goli Rahimi, Paul Evans, Monica Kurnatowska and Blair Robinson.
Our team is busy advising multinational companies on employment law issues surrounding workplace
This summer the US Supreme Court will rule on the legality of using race as an affirmative action measure in admissions at Harvard and at the University of North Carolina. The legal framework for evaluating affirmative action programs in higher education is definitively different than for inclusion, diversity and equity (ID&E) programs in the employment context. Notwithstanding this distinction, the decision will signal how courts review workplace ID&E practices and policies, and may encourage legal challenges regarding the same.
The timing of this case coincides with a growing trend of state and local legislation seeking to restrict workplace ID&E efforts, increasing claims of reverse discrimination, continued shareholder action in the ID&E space, including some actions challenging the devotion of resources to ID&E as not in the interest of shareholders, and attacks on laws mandating diversity on corporate boards.
In 2014, Students for Fair Admissions (a nonprofit group of “students, parents and others who believe that racial classifications and preferences in college admissions are unfair, unnecessary, and unconstitutional”) sued both Harvard and UNC in federal court alleging that race-conscious admissions programs are unlawful. Both universities won at the trial court level. Now, SFFA has asked the Supreme Court to overrule its prior decisions and hold that the consideration of race as part of a holistic college admissions process in order to achieve a diverse student body violates Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution.
Special thanks to co-presenter, Monica Kurnatowska.
The trend in increased pay equity-related reporting requirements for employers is just one reason more organizations are conducting pay equity audits to identify and correct pay variations between employees who perform similar work. The recently adopted EU Pay Transparency Directive (read more here) is one more law
As most California employers know by now, Senate Bill 1162 requires private employers of 100 or more employees (with at least one employee in California) to report pay and demographic data to the California Civil Rights Department (CRD) (formerly the Department of Fair Employment and Housing). Complicating matters, the law was amended to add a requirement to report data regarding workers hired through labor contractors.
The deadline for submitting pay data reports is May 10. If you are having trouble gathering information from labor contractors, you are not alone. So, if it looks like you might be late on the labor contractor employee report, we recommend seeking an extension from CRD through the portal ASAP. The good news is that extensions are available, but only for the labor contractor reports, and only through the portal. (Link here.) Requests for an extension must be submitted on or before May 10.
California has required all employers to provide lactation breaks (unless they can show that to do so would “seriously disrupt” their operations) since 2020. The federal government caught up late last year with the Providing Urgent Maternal Protections for Nursing Mothers Act (PUMP Act).
PUMP Act — The Basics
Effective December 29, 2022, the PUMP Act expands workplace protections for employees with a need to express breast milk. The Pump Act amends the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), which required employers to provide lactating non-exempt employees with reasonable break time and a private location to express milk for one year following the birth of a child.
The previous law excluded most salaried employees, and the PUMP Act expands this right to cover all employees whether exempt or non-exempt. Now employers must provide all employees a reasonable break to express milk each time the employee has a need to express milk for one year after the child’s birth.
Special thanks to co-presenter, Marredia Crawford.
It’s common practice for companies to collect diversity data and use it to assist in analyzing the concrete benefits of current inclusion, diversity and equity (ID&E) efforts in the workplace, and for recalibrating ID&E goals. However, collecting and managing diversity data can be fraught with risk.
In this
Special thanks to co-presenter, Jennifer Bernardo.
With a surge in layoffs taking place over the past year, many of those originally hired to diversify the workplace have been impacted, and studies show that inclusion, diversity and equity (ID&E) professionals have been affected by layoffs at a higher rate than others. The harm? Other than
Join us for a four-part webinar series as our US moderators welcome colleagues from around the globe to share the latest labor and employment law updates and trends. US-based multinational employers with business operations in Asia Pacific, Europe, the Middle East and Africa, and the Americas regions will hear directly from local practitioners on the
As volatility and uncertainty in the global economy continues, many multinationals are taking (or considering) major changes to their workforce composition. Labor costs are typically the largest cost center for any company, so of course businesses need to understand how best to flex up and down as markets change. At the same time, a company’s
March 14, 2023, is recognized as Equal Pay Day in the US. This date symbolizes how far into the year women must work to earn the same amount that men earned in the previous year. Because women earn less, on average, than men (according to the US Census Bureau), they must work longer for
