Engaging in the interactive process is an important — and sometimes overlooked — part of an employer’s response to a request for a reasonable accommodation under state and federal law.

I talked about this way back in 2008 (!) when the state Supreme Court released it’s landmark Curry v. Allen S. Goodman decision expanding the

If you look at the state Department of Labor website, you’ll find a notation about “proposed amended FMLA regulations” that have not yet been put into place. It adds “approval pending”.

As the modern saying goes: Don’t believe everything you read on the Internet.

In fact, last month – as I previewed in

A while back, my colleagues and I talked about new final proposed regulations implementing the revised CTFMLA law.

Turns out that “final” doesn’t actually mean FINAL.

On June 28, 2022, the Legislation Regulation Review Committee (LRCC) rejected the so-called “final” regulation without prejudice and asked that a number of corrections be made to the regulations.

It would be easy to say that the Supreme Court’s decision on Friday has nothing to do with the workplace and therefore presents no employment law issues.

But such an approach would not only be foolish, it would be wrong.

The full impact of the decision will be felt for an entire generation while a full analysis of the decision’s impact will take some more time too (though my partners have done a great job with one here).  But it’s apparent from the first few reads of the Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization is that it presents a real challenge for employers and is so disruptive in so many ways both for employers and employees.

First, the decision minimizes (at best) or ignores (at worst) the concept of “stare decisis” which is that the Court’s prior decisions become binding precedent — and therefore have meaning.  People can rely on those decisions to predict what will happen next and respect the decision once it gets made.  If the Court undermines that concept, it risks becoming exactly like the much maligned National Labor Relations Board. The NLRB is a federal agency that, some would argue, changes its mind depending on how the Board is composed (whether Democrat majority or Republican).  For example of such a flip flop, see one of my prior posts about the NLRB here.

This is not a good thing; the Rule of Law depends on people having some faith in the institution itself.  If people think the system is rigged to whatever party is in power, then the more likely they will be to minimize its importance or keep fighting until they think the system is in their favor.  Stare Decisis provided some measure of comfort to parties and gave employers the opportunity to plan for the future.

Continue Reading Dobbs and the Impact of the Court’s Decision for Employers

With inflation running rampant, it’s easy to forget that changes to the state’s minimum wage continue to roll out.  Ever since the passage of the wage hikes a few years ago, employers have been dealing with $1 increases each year.

On July 1, 2022, the minimum wage per hour will increase to $14/hour.  Next year,

With union organizing efforts making headlines at Amazon and Starbucks, a new bill in Connecticut is designed to make it even easier for unions to win organizing votes.

A bill banning so-called “captive audience” meetings won final approval from the Connecticut General Assembly late Friday; it moves to the Governor’s office where his approval

In January 2021, I wrote about the potential for a new wave of lawsuits that employers needed to pay attention to — lawsuits (and criminal charges) based on antitrust law.  In that post, I highlighted a little-noticed case in which the U.S. Department of Justice had indicted a Texas company for its no poaching agreements

With the end of the year finally here, I know I could do yet another post on the OSHA vax-or-test standard given that the Supreme Court on Wednesday announced expedited oral arguments on the legality of that rule and the vaccine mandate for healthcare workers. That’s now scheduled for January 7, 2022.

But really, with

While mandatory vaccination policies are all the rage now, there’s an important new Connecticut law that is a “must-do” for employers here and not much time left to get into compliance.

Effective October 1, 2021, employers are prohibited from failing or refusing to provide a job applicant with the “wage range” of the position for