BCLP At Work

BCLP At Work

Hiring

Main Content

Antitrust Division to Criminally Prosecute No Poaching Agreements

February 9, 2018

Categories

Antitrust Division to Criminally Prosecute No Poaching Agreements

February 9, 2018

Authored by: Bryan Cave At Work

The DOJ has indicated that it intends to prosecute companies that have entered into no-poaching agreements, an activity that has previously only been subject to civil enforcement. No-poaching agreements are arrangements between companies to not solicit or hire each other’s employees. Companies engaged in this conduct do not have to compete for customers to be susceptible to government scrutiny; they only need to compete for the same employees.

Our Antitrust practice group has recently written a client alert on this topic. Click here to read the full alert.

Kansas City Votes to “Ban the Box”

February 9, 2018

Categories

On February 1, 2018, Kansas City, Missouri joined the ranks of more than 150 cities and counties to enact a “ban the box” ordinance, aimed at equalizing the chances to gain employment by those previously convicted of a crime.  Effective June 9, 2018, the ordinance expands Kansas City’s 2013 ordinance that applied only to city employees.  The new ordinance, “Criminal Records in Employment,” found at Section 38-104, applies to most employers employing six or more in Kansas City.  It excludes employers that are prohibited by a local, state, or federal law or regulation from considering applicants with a criminal record.

Under the ordinance, employers are banned from inquiring into an applicant’s criminal history until after the applicant has been interviewed, i.e., employers can no longer ask about criminal convictions on an employment application.  Criminal history is defined in the ordinance to include felony and misdemeanor convictions, guilty and no contest

Serious changes for fixed-term employment in Germany announced

The formation of a new government in Germany has not yet been completed however since February 7, 2018, the coalition agreement has been signed. Such political guidelines were consistently implemented during the last legislative periods.

The changes affect fixed-term contracts which require no objective grounds for limitation. The maximum permissible duration of such fixed-term contracts will be reduced from 24 to 18 months. While previously a three-time extension of these contracts was allowed, this should now be possible only once within those 18 months.

The permitted number of such fixed-term employment contracts will also be limited. Employers with more than 75 employees should only be allowed a maximum of 2.5 percent of the workforce for non-material fixed-term contracts. Exceeding the quota leads to the ineffectiveness of any further fixed-term employment contract, and to permanent employment contracts.

Fixed-term contracts with objective grounds for limitation, in practice used if the employee has

Paving the Way for Unpaid Interns: Trump Administration Relaxes the Standards

Internships are often a great way for students and young people to get their foot in the door and land their first job. But employers must ask themselves: is your unpaid intern actually an intern, or is the “intern” really an employee entitled to wages? Last week, the Department of Labor (“DOL”) aimed to provide clarity and flexibility when it revised its guidance for determining whether an unpaid intern is an “employee” who must be paid under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”).

Unpaid internships have been the focus of some legal uncertainty over the past several years. The source of that uncertainty may be the FLSA’s simplistic definition of “employee” as “an individual employed by an employer.” The Supreme Court has yet to fully address the difference between unpaid interns and paid employees, but in 1947, the Court recognized that unpaid trainees should not be treated as

NYC Employers Beware: Asking About Applicants’ Salary History Now Prohibited by Law

Beginning October 31, 2017, employers in New York City will be prohibited from asking job applicants about their previous salary. The legislation is aimed at breaking the cycle of wage inequality affecting women and people of color by requiring employers to base compensation on the applicant’s qualifications, not previous salary.

Which businesses are covered by the law?

Any employer which employs at least one employee in New York City is covered.

What type of job applicants are protected by the law?

All new hires, regardless of whether they are applying for full-time, part-time, or internship positions are covered.  The law does not apply to an employer’s current employees applying for an internal transfer or promotion in the same company.

What is the employer banned from doing?

No Inquiry: Employers may not ask candidates about their salary history (previous salary, benefits, and other types of compensation) at any time in

California Bans the Box: Employers Must Review and Update Background Screening Processes

Recently, on October 14, 2017, Governor Jerry Brown signed Assembly Bill 1008 (“AB 1008”), which adds Government Code Section 12952 into state law.  Among other things, this new provision makes it an unlawful employment practice under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”) for a private employer with five (5) or more employees to inquire about or consider a job applicant’s conviction history prior to a conditional offer of employment.  This “ban-the-box” legislation is the latest in a series of initiatives nationwide to ban private employers from inquiring about convictions on an application for employment.   California joins five other states, including Connecticut, Illinois, New Jersey, Oregon, and Vermont, in banning private employers’ inquiries regarding convictions prior to a conditional offer of employment.  AB 1008 becomes effective January 1, 2018.

Only Post-Offer Consideration of a Conviction or Specified Arrests is Permissible.  Most dramatically, employers may not ask an applicant about any

Some States and Municipalities Begin the Ban on Salary History Inquiries

September 19, 2017

Categories

Many employers base an employee’s pay on his or her past salary.  Applicants are typically asked, either on the application or during an interview, how much they made in their previous job(s).  Critics of this practice believe using salary history to set current salary is discriminatory and prohibits women and minorities, frequently paid less than their white male counterparts, from overcoming pay disparity.

In April 2017, in Rizo v. Yovino, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals held that salary history is a valid justification for paying a female employee less than her male counterpart, so long as the employer’s use of the salary history was reasonable and accomplished a business purpose.  Several states and municipalities, perhaps in response to Rizo, have enacted and/or proposed legislation prohibiting the practice of asking applicants about their salary history.  Other states and municipalities previously banned this practice.

In June 2017, both Delaware and Oregon

Starting Up – Set Up Part 3

September 11, 2017

Categories

Starting Up – Set Up Part 3

September 11, 2017

Authored by: Bryan Cave At Work

Part One of this series focused on several of the federal and local filings and registrations that new employers will need to make in preparation for their first hires. In Part Two, we dove into drafting job descriptions and their use in determining whether a position should be classified as exempt or non-exempt under federal and local wage and hour laws. In Part Three, the final post in this three-part series, we’re examining the specifics involved in extending an employment offer. Whether it’s your first time or your twenty-first time, making a job offer is exciting−you’ve finally found your ideal candidate and are looking forward to a bright future together!  But the start of the employment relationship also starts the clock on a number of employer obligations and opportunities.

For example, certain states require employers to provide their employees with written notice of certain job-specific information at the

Starting Up – Set Up Part 2

September 4, 2017

Categories

Starting Up – Set Up Part 2

September 4, 2017

Authored by: Bryan Cave At Work

This three-part series highlights the steps startups should take before hiring their first employee. Part One of this series focused on several of the federal and local filings and registrations that new employers will need to make in preparation for their first hires. In this Part Two, we’re diving into drafting job descriptions and their use in determining whether a position should be classified as exempt or non-exempt under federal and local wage and hour laws.

A well-drafted job description provides employees and employers alike with a wealth of information, including the necessary qualifications, responsibilities, and pay rate of the relevant position.  The drafting alone is a great exercise for small companies to think about how they want to distribute their work.  Job descriptions can also serve the basis for – and later support – the classification of a position as exempt under wage and hour laws.

The federal Fair

Starting Up – Set Up Part 1

Starting Up – Set Up Part 1

August 28, 2017

Authored by: Bryan Cave At Work

So you’ve decided to take your company to the next level by expanding your staff.  Great!  But being an “Employer” under the law is more than just a title, so before you extend your first offer, make sure your startup is set up for success.  Part One of this three-part series will focus on several of the federal and local filings and registrations that new employers will need to make in preparation for their first hires.

First, the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) requires every employer to have an employment identification number (“EIN”).  An EIN, sometimes referred to as a Federal Tax Identification Number, is required to report business and employee tax information.  As such, any new employer’s first task should be to obtain an EIN. After applying for a federal EIN, new employers should confirm whether the state in which they conduct business also requires employers to obtain local EINs. 

The attorneys of Bryan Cave LLP make this site available to you only for the educational purposes of imparting general information and a general understanding of the law. This site does not offer specific legal advice. Your use of this site does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and Bryan Cave LLP or any of its attorneys. Do not use this site as a substitute for specific legal advice from a licensed attorney. Much of the information on this site is based upon preliminary discussions in the absence of definitive advice or policy statements and therefore may change as soon as more definitive advice is available. Please review our full disclaimer.