alexskopje © depositphotos.com

New York Cannot Prohibit the Arbitration of Sexual Harassment Claims

Last year, amid the growing #MeToo movement, New York enacted a law that prohibited the mandatory arbitration of sexual harassment claims. The law declared any such contract provision entered on or after July 11, 2018, to be “null and void.” N.Y.C.P.L.R. 7515 (“7515”). Even before it was passed, legislators were concerned about the law’s ability to withstand challenge that it was preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), which provides for the judicial enforcement of arbitration agreements and awards (the FAA applies in both state courts and federal courts). The U.S. Supreme Court strongly supports the FAA and has repeatedly ruled that its pro-arbitration mandate must be broadly interpreted. Perhaps aware of 7515’s shaky foundation in light of the FAA, the statute states that it applies “except where inconsistent with federal law.” N.Y.C.P.L.R. 7515(a)(4)(b)(i). (Read More)

Jason Speros © 123RF.com

Supreme Court Rules a Plaintiff’s Failure to File EEOC Charge Is Not Fatal to Title VII Lawsuit Unless Timely Raised by a Defendant

It’s a given that employers are prohibited from discriminating against employees on the basis of sex, race, color, national origin and religion – this according to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which generally applies to employers with 15 or more employees, including federal, state and local governments. It’s also been a given that a court lacked jurisdiction over a court action for discrimination under Title VII until and unless an employee first filed a charge of discrimination on the underlying claim with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Not anymore. By way of its recent ruling in Fort Bend County v. Davis, the U.S. Supreme Court has determined that this now-familiar administrative filing precondition is a “procedural obligation” and not a jurisdictional prerequisite to a lawsuit. (Read More)

Tsekhmister © depositphotos.com

Attention Employers: Prepare for Reinstated EEO-1 Pay Data Reporting by Summer’s End

Does your company employ 100 people or more? If so, be forewarned – a federal court has lifted the Office of Management and Budget’s stay of the revised EEO-1 form that requires companies to submit a summary of 2018 wage information and hours worked for all employees by race, ethnicity and sex by job category to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). (Read More)

Madelyn M. Polzin ©

Amendments Bring New Clarity to CCPA Scope in Advance of 2020 Deadline

In the rush to pass AB-375 (the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA)) before the 2018 deadline to withdraw the looming ballot initiative, it was clear that amendments would be necessary.  Mere months after its passage, SB-1121 was passed to clean up technical and grammatical errors, but the more substantial revisions were anticipated this year.  In tracking those amendments, businesses have gained clarity on their 2020 compliance obligations. (Read More)

AndrewLozovyi © depositphotos.com

Attention Agents: Fees Charged May Be Unlawful

Brokers and agents take note – an appellate court in California handed down a decision earlier this month that strikes at the legality of “broker fees” charged by agents. (Read More)

BrianAJackson © depositphotos.com

Federal Reserve Seeks to Bar Bankers for Misappropriation

A greater awareness of the need to guard against misappropriation of trade secrets and the need for effective remedies has become a rather hot topic of late. With the passage of the Federal Defend Trade Secrets Act, Congress federalized the fight against trade secret misappropriation with the effect that there will eventually be a consistent application of trade secret law across the United States. Regulatory bodies are also ramping up their efforts to stem misappropriation. For example, the DOJ has formed the Intellectual Property Task Force. (Read More)

congerdesign © pixabay.com

Blueberry Muffin Beer Not on Tap at the Trademark Office

As seen on www.craftbrewingbusiness.com:

How does a nice frosty Blueberry Muffin sound on a hot summer day? No, not the baked variety, but a blueberry muffin-flavored beer brought to you by the folks at Humboldt Street Collective LLC, dba Great Notion Brewing and Barrel House. If such a brew sounds appealing, that’s great, but you won’t be finding it under the BLUEBERRY MUFFIN trademark. And that’s because the USPTO’s Trademark Trial and Appeals Board (“TTAB”) refused to register the word mark BLUEBERRY MUFFIN, which Great Notion Brewing recently applied for. The TTAB determined that Blueberry Muffin is a generic term that should be available to describe any beer having a blueberry muffin-like flavor, and not just Great Notion Brewing’s product. But the decision is a questionable one. (Read More)

phartisan © 123RF.com

Another Class Action-Related Gift to Employers from the U.S. Supreme Court  

Nearly a year after its decision in Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis, finding that class and collective action waivers contained in employer arbitration agreements are lawful and enforceable under the Federal Arbitration Act, the U.S. Supreme Court has spoken once more on the topic. This week, in Lamps Plus Inc. v. Varela, the high court ruled that arbitration agreements must specifically contemplate class arbitration for that process to be invoked. (Read More)

Madelyn M. Polzin ©

Oh, Say Can You CCPA

Does your company collect personal information on California residents and meet ANY of the following criteria?

1. Annual gross revenue in excess of $25 million.

2. Individually, or combined with affiliates, buys, sells, or shares the personal information of 50,000 or more consumers, households, or devices.

3. Derives 50% or more of its annual revenue from the sale of consumers’ personal information.

If so, say hello to the California Consumer Privacy Act – considered to be the strictest data privacy law in the United States – which you will be subject to beginning on January 1, 2020. (Read More)

Illia Uriadnikov © 123RF.com

California's Consumer Privacy Act: The Public Has Spoken

Last June, the California Consumer Privacy Act – which is considered to be the strictest data privacy law in the United States – was signed into law. Among other things, the CCPA gives Californians the right to know what personal information (PI) is being collected about them, whether their PI is being sold and to whom, the right to access their PI, the right to delete PI collected from them, and the right to opt-out to the sale of their PI. (Read More)