UPDATED

Over the last 24 hours, it seems that every politician is decrying the use of Connecticut wage and hour laws as apparent support for AIG’s payout of various retention payments. Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal’s comments are among the most pointed, according to Capitol Watch:

"I have significant doubts about the validity of

Remember a Connecticut appellate decision a few weeks ago that suggested that a bonus allegedly promised to an associate could be "wages" under Connecticut’s wage statutes? Indeed, a fellow Connecticut blogger suggested that 2008 was shaping to be a banner ynot public domain - see original link at morgue fileear for employees.

Well, not so fast. A new Connecticut Supreme Court decision today

Yesterday, I discussed the employment contract portion of a new Appellate Court case, Ziotas v. The Reardon Law Firm (download here). 

Today, I’ll discuss the second part of the court’s decision on whether the associate’s bonus could be said to be "wages". Why is this important? Because under state law (Conn. Gen. Stat. 31-72)

In a decision released today, the Connecticut Appellate Court upheld a lower court judgment that found that a local lawfirm breached its employment contract to an associate by failing to pay that associate a bonus.

It’s rare to see lawfirms involved in employment disputes, and even rarer, to have cases proceed all the way to

Two new sets of statistics released this month by the Connecticut Department of Labor shed some light into the workplaces in Connecticut.

First and foremost, the number of deaths in the workplace last year remained the same as in 2006 — 38.  While any death is tragic, the rate is far below the national average. 

You know it’s summer when the most exciting headline in employment law over the last day seems to be the markup of an arbitration fairness bill by a House Judiciary Subcommittee.  Not terribly exciting.  If you’d like more details on that bill, Workplace Horizons has a nice little summary and does it’s typical terrific job on keeping

Connecticut’s wage payment statutes, with the definition of wages found at Conn. Gen. Stat. 31-71a(3), certainly have left courts room to interpret the statute. After all, the definition of wages is merely: 

compensation for labor or services rendered by an employee, whether the amount is determined on a time, task, piece, commission or other

The Connecticut Supreme Court today ruled (in a decision that will be "officially released" on June 24, 2008) that an agreement between an employer and his employees to defer an employee’s past wages until the employer receives revenue sufficient to pay those wages, is contrary to public policy , therefore, an invalid defense in a