Last month the Seventh Circuit drew a distinction between “commissions” and “bonuses” as those terms are used in the Illinois Wage Payment and Collection Act (IWPCA) and its implementing regulations. For employers, particularly those in retail, Sutula-Johnson v. Office Depot informs how employers structure, amend and communicate their employee incentive compensation schemes.
Continue Reading Be Careful What You Call It — Commission Plans In Illinois
Following the Senate’s historic vote in favor of Bill C-45, the Cannabis Act, the Federal Government announced on June 20, 2018 that recreational marijuana will become legal on October 17, 2018. In anticipation of Bill C-45 becoming law, the provinces have begun preparing a framework for regulating the production, distribution, sale, possession and consumption of cannabis. Ontario’s response is Bill 174. With legalization fast approaching, we outline below key aspects of Bill 174 and steps to help employers prepare for the new reality.
Click here for more specifics on the bill and how employers should prepare.
(Huge thanks to our own Jordan Kirkness and Susan MacMillan for sharing this with us.)
Originally published by Bloomberg Law.
Pay equity is a hot button issue for employers in the United States for a number of reasons—reputational concerns are triggered with increasing shareholder demands for transparency; activist investor groups are pushing companies, particularly in the financial services and technology industries, to disclose gender pay data; and, in the wake of pay equity in the news, employees are asking more questions about the issue.
Compounding the pressure, the gender pay gap also can impact talent acquisition. A recent Glassdoor survey found that 67% of US employees say they would not apply for jobs at employers where they believe a gender pay gap exists. The impact is magnified when looking at millennials. Approximately 80% of millennials, as noted in the Glassdoor survey, say they would not even apply for a job if they believed the company had a gender pay gap, which drives home the point that focusing on equality is, among other things, essential for a positive employer brand in the US market.
Click here to read on.
On June 26, the Supreme Court upheld President Trump’s controversial Executive Order 9645, commonly referred to as the Travel Ban, in a 5-4 decision.
The Travel Ban restricts entry into the United States for citizens of seven countries: North Korea, Syria, Libya, Yemen, Somalia, Iran and Venezuela. The table below describes the impact of the ban for citizens of each country:
| Country | Impact |
| Iran | All entry prohibited except by persons holding nonimmigrant student (F and M) and exchange-visitor (J) visas. |
| Libya | Prohibited from entering the US as immigrants or on a business/visitor (B1/B2) visa. No other restrictions are expressly stated. |
| North Korea | All entry into the US prohibited. |
| Somalia | Prohibited from obtaining immigrant visas; nonimmigrant visas may be subject to heightened scrutiny. |
| Syria | All entry into the US prohibited. |
| Venezuela | Government officials and their family members are restricted from entry on a business/visitor (B1/B2) visa. Other visa holders may be subject to verification of traveler information. |
| Yemen | Prohibited from entering the US as immigrants or on a business/visitor (B1/B2) visa. No other restrictions are expressly stated. |
Click here to learn more about exceptions to the ban, and next steps for employers.
On June 20, our partners Bill Dugan and Meredith Kaufman presented to the New York City chapter of the ACC on Minding the (Gender Pay) Gap. Along with two in-house counsel panelists, Meredith and Bill discussed strategies for complying with equal pay protections under state and local laws and narrowing the pay gap.
One clear theme of the panel discussion was that pay equity cannot be viewed in a vacuum. As Meredith explained:
With equal pay protections expanding, it’s a critical time for clients to identify and rectify unjustified pay disparities between men and women. An effective remediation plan may include salary increases, but employers also need to address systemic bias and harassment to root out pay inequality.
Another takeaway was the importance of maintaining the attorney-client privilege when conducting pay audits. Bill noted:
We regularly undertake pay audits, including an in-house analysis of data, for our clients. Conducting these audits under privilege allows us to identify potential exposure and advise on strategies to reduce legal risk, while protecting the analysis from disclosure as much as possible.
For more on how Baker McKenzie is assisting clients with their gender pay and pay equity compliance, please visit our Gender Pay Gap webpage.
In our latest episode, listen to partners Arthur Rooney and Mike Brewer discuss the recent decision from the US Supreme Court regarding class action waivers in arbitration agreements.
Download this episode (and more) on iTunes | Android | Stitcher | TuneIn | Google Play.
In late May, California announced new amendments to the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) strengthening the protections afforded to applicants and employees, including those who are undocumented, on the basis of national origin. The changes go into effect July 1, 2018. The new regulations significantly broaden the definition of “national origin” as well as conduct that constitutes discrimination based on national origin.
Continue Reading California Expands National Origin Protections In The Workplace
In a narrow ruling on June 4, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in favor of a Colorado baker who refused to bake a cake for a couple celebrating a same-sex wedding on the basis of his religious opposition to same-sex marriages. (Same-sex marriages were not legal in Colorado at the time.) After the baker rebuffed the couple in 2012, they filed a charge with the Colorado Civil Rights Commission pursuant to the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act (CADA) which prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation in a “place of business engaged in any sales to the public and any place offering services . . . to the public.”
Two recent events in the US vividly illustrate the growing centrality of gender pay equity issues. On one side of the ledger, in early April 2018, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in Rizo v. Fresno County Office of Education, held that an employee’s prior salary—either alone or in a combination of factors—cannot be used to justify paying women less than men in comparable jobs. On the other side of the ledger, the US Department of Labor’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, on April 20, 2018, announced that it is upending standards implemented during President Obama’s administration designed to promote gender pay equity among federal contractors. Under this new policy, employers will be able to decide for themselves how their employees should be categorized and analyzed for purposes of fair pay investigations by the government.
These two US events are merely the latest examples of increased activity around the globe with regard to the issue of pay equity. Click here to read more.
