Posts

Third Circuit: FAAAA Does Not Preempt State Independent Contractor Laws

APPLIES TO

All Employers with DE, NJ, PA, or Virgin Islands Employees

EFFECTIVE

January 29, 2019

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

In Bedoya v. American Eagle Express Inc., the Third Circuit Court of Appeal stated that the Federal Aviation Authorization Administration Act of 1994 (FAAAA) does not preempt New Jersey’s wage and hour laws, permitting delivery drivers to continue with a suit under state wage and hour laws for improper classification as independent contractors.

Read more

Third Circuit: Employee’s Refusal to Report Sexual Harassment Does Not Bar Claims Against Employer

APPLIES TO

All Employers with DE, NJ, and PA Employees

EFFECTIVE

July 3, 2018

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

In Minarsky v. Susquehanna Cty., the Third Circuit Court of Appeal recently rejected the notion that an employee’s refusal to report sexual harassment automatically invalidated the employee’s harassment claim against the employer. There, the employee’s supervisor made unwanted sexual advances towards her and other women for years.  The supervisor was reprimanded for incidents involving other women, but no further action was taken against him.  In this case, the employee did not report her supervisor’s conduct for fear of losing her job.  The County later terminated the supervisor after discovering the persistent harassment of the employee. Subsequently, the employee sued.

Third Circuit: WARN Notice Requirements Apply if Layoff is “Probable,” Not “Possible”

APPLIES TO

All Employers with DE, NJ, PA, and Virgin Islands Employees

EFFECTIVE

August 4, 2017

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

The Third Circuit Court of Appeal recently joined other courts in stating that employers must obey the notice requirements required under the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (“WARN”) Act when a layoff is “probable,” that is, more likely than not to occur.  A layoff or business closure being simply “possible” does not necessarily trigger the notice requirements of the WARN Act.