Labor & Employment Law
- Discrimination & Disability Law
- Pro Bono Outreach
- State Employment Law
- Union Activity & Individual Employee Rights
|Second Annual Executive Branch Review Conference|
|Donning and Doffing Decided - Podcast|
On January 27, 2014, in Sandifer v. United States Steel, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that time employee time spent donning and doffing their protective gear is not compensable by application of the Fair Labor Standards Act. The impact of the Court’s decision may have a substantial impact on employers, especially manufacturers. Our experts discussed the breadth and impact of the decision.
|Unionizing Domestic Workers? - Harris v. Quinn - Podcast|
On January 21, 2014, the Supreme Court heard Harris v. Quinn, which considers (1) whether a state may, consistent with the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, compel personal care providers to accept and financially support a private organization as their exclusive representative to petition the state for greater reimbursements from its Medicaid programs; and (2) whether the lower court erred in holding that the claims of providers in the Home Based Support Services Program are not ripe for judicial review. Our expert attended the oral arguments and offered his analysis of the merits of the case and its likely outcome.
|Recess Appointments in the Supreme Court: Noel Canning - Podcast|
In Noel Canning v. NLRB, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit held that the President's 2012 recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board were unconstitutional, which meant the Board lacked a quorum to conduct business. The President made these appointments during an intra-session recess shorter than three days, a move no previous President had tried. But the court's reasoning in Noel Canning extended beyond these circumstances. Taking an orginalist approach to the Recess Appointments Clause, the court held that the President cannot make recess appointments during intra-session recesses at all, but only during the recess that occurs between the end of one session of Congress and the beginning of the next. The court held further that the President cannot fill a vacancy with a recess appointment unless the vacancy arises during that same recess. This reasoning calls into question the validity of virtually every recess appointment in modern history. The NLRB stated that it would continue to conduct business as usual. The government subsequently petitioned the Supreme Court for cert to hear the case. Later last year, the Senate confirmed President Obama’s NLRB nominees, and the all Board seats are currently filled. Meanwhile, the Noel Canningdecision is being invoked to challenge NLRB decisions in dozens of other cases around the country.
On January 13, 2014, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in NLRB v. Noel Canning. This teleforum will discuss the Noel Canning case itself, whether the Board validly continued to function without Supreme Court resolution of the validity of the recess appointments, and how the decision is likely to be decided.
|The Electorate and the Courts - Event Audio/Video|
Closing Panel: The Electorate and the Courts