Uncategorized

How to Save Money on Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) Claims

Low-value claims by employees against their former employers under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) are sometimes more about the attorney’s fees for the employee’s lawyer and less about compensating the employee for the alleged injury.  Consider, for example, an FLSA claim asserted by a former employee seeking unpaid wages or overtime compensation in an amount less than $1,000.  If there is a significant risk that the employer may be found liable for that amount…

How to Save Money on Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) Claims Read More »

State Employees Cannot Sue for Denial of FMLA “Self Care” Leave

Under the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (FMLA, or the “Act”), eligible employees are entitled to take up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave during any 12-month period, without fear of losing their job.  If an employer violates its employee’s FMLA rights, the employee can usually sue the employer in federal court to recover monetary damages (including lost wages & benefits, liquidated damages, and possibly attorneys’ fees).  See 29 U.S.C. § 2617; 29 C.F.R. §825.400(c).

State Employees Cannot Sue for Denial of FMLA “Self Care” Leave Read More »

NLRB RELEASES THIRD MEMO ANALYZING THE LEGALITY OF EMPLOYER SOCIAL MEDIA POLICIES

Most employers would not think that there is anything unlawful about telling their employees to refrain from making “offensive, demeaning, abusive or inappropriate remarks” in social media.  Similarly, most employers would think that instructing employees not to “reveal non-public company information on any public site” is a smart thing to do.  However, the National Labor Relations Board, in its most recent memo summarizing its recent social media cases, found these and other statements by employers to

NLRB RELEASES THIRD MEMO ANALYZING THE LEGALITY OF EMPLOYER SOCIAL MEDIA POLICIES Read More »

Maryland Federal Court Voids Non-Compete Even After “Blue Penciling” It.

Unlike Virginia, Maryland law allows courts in that state to “blue-pencil” or selectively delete terms in a non-compete to make it enforceable.  In a July 11, 2011 decision, however, the Maryland Federal Court blue-penciled a non-compete and still found that it was facially overbroad and unenforceable because it did not define “competitors”.  The case is SNS One, Inc. v. Hage, and concerned a non-compete clause that an IT government contractor, SNS One, Inc., made its employees

Maryland Federal Court Voids Non-Compete Even After “Blue Penciling” It. Read More »

Employees Continue to Face a Tough Road to Establishing Exceptions to At-Will Employment

In Virginia, as in many states, employees are considered to be at-will, meaning that either party may terminate the employment relationship at any time and for any reason.  However, the Virginia Supreme Court has carved out a narrow exception to at-will employment when the termination of employment violates Virginia’s public policy.  As a recent case shows, courts are very hesitant to enlarge the exception to at-will employment. In the 1985, the Virginia Supreme Court first

Employees Continue to Face a Tough Road to Establishing Exceptions to At-Will Employment Read More »

Scroll to Top