A few weeks ago, I sat down and crafted an article for the Connecticut Law Tribune that laid out my predictions for 2012.  That article was finally published this week here.

Among the topics I tackle are new U.S. Supreme Court and Connecticut Supreme Court decisions, possible new legislative developments, and whether the trend of wage/hour cases will continue.

Of course, in between the time I wrote the article and the time it was published, one of the topics has already been affected. The NLRB announced late last year that it was postponing implementation of the new posting requirements from January 31, 2012 to April 30, 2012.  While I still think that the posting requirements are going to be upheld by a court, the persistent delays by the NLRB have me thinking that perhaps the posters may not be a sure thing after all.  We’ll have to wait and see.

In such a short article, there’s plenty that I was not able to cover.  For example, employers are unlikely to see any new developments from U.S. Congress as gridlock continues.  And what’s the future of the NLRB in light of such gridlock?  Other questions persist as well: Can employers still use the expired FMLA forms? (Jeff Nowak of the FMLA Insights blog tackles that one today.)

What are your predictions for 2012? Post them in the comments below and we’ll check on them at the end of the year.

  • Charles Krich

    Nice article. Let me add some other predictions:

    – The two human rights referees who started in mid-December will reactivate the CHRO’s public hearing process in the next month or so.

    – The CT Supreme Court will affirm Patino v. Birken Mfg. Co. Of more interest than the law it will make on sexual harassment based on sexual orientation will be the affirmance of what for CT is a large damage award for emotional distress (something like $90,000).

    – The General Assembly will add veteran status to the list of classes protected under CFEPA.

    – We will see a modest uptick in case closures for the CHRO despite the fact that the agency’s budget remains static. Fewer case closures will result from MAR dismissals.

    – The Appellate Court will affirm CHRO v. City of Hartford, extending protection in a case of transgender discrimination brought before P.A. 11-55 took effect under a variety of legal theories (disabililty, sex).

    – The Appellate Court will reverse Desrosiers v. Diageo North America, Inc., a perceived disability discrimination case, relying on the analysis found in Curry v. Alan S. Goodman, Inc.

    – The Appellate Court will find that punitive damages are not recoverable for a CFEPA violation in Tomick v. UPS.