The Dallas Hospitality Employment Lawyer Blog

Today the United States Department of Labor issued the long-awaited, updated Final Rule revising the federal regulations under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") implementing the exemption from minimum wage and overtime pay for executive, administrative, professional, outside sales, and computer employees.  Here are the highlights from the 508-page release that employers need to know: The salary test for EAP workers (defined as executive, administrative and professional employees under the current FLSA tests) has more than doubled from $455 per week ($23,360 per year) to $913 per week ($47,476 per year).   The DOL did not make any changes to the EAP duties tests. The highly-compensated employee total annual compensation level has increased from $100,000 to $134,004. For the first time, employers will be permitted to count non-discretionary bonuses, incentives, and commissions toward up to 10% of the standard weekly salary test, as long as employers pay those am...

The International Franchise Association defines franchising as a method for expanding business and distributing goods through a licensing agreement.    In the franchisor-franchisee relationship, a franchisor typically grants a license to a franchisee to conduct business under the trademark and trade name of the franchisor.   http://www.franchise.org/what-is-a-franchise .   For obvious reasons, the franchisor has a vested interest in ensuring that the franchisee maintains the quality and integrity of the brand, which in turn, generally requires some level of oversight of the franchisee’s operations.   But how much control can a franchisor exercise before it crosses the threshold and becomes a joint employer with its franchisee for purposes of establishing liability? The Texas Labor Code Effective September 1, 2015, and in an apparent response to the federal government’s efforts to find joint employers behind every corner, the Texas Legislature amended se...

After a nearly eight-year battle with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and several intervenors, a Denver airport contractor defeated a lawsuit alleging it failed to accommodate Muslim women who asked to wear long skirts at work based on their religious belief that women should dress modestly.   See EEOC v. Jetstream Ground Services, Inc ., No. 13-cv-02340-CMA-KMT, in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado.   The contractor, Jetstream Ground Services, argued that allowing the women to work in long skirts as aircraft cabin cleaners posed an undue hardship based on the safety risks they faced when accessing aircraft from jetway stairs.   Last fall, the district court refused to grant summary judgment on this issue for Jetstream, and the case proceeded to trial. Last week, a federal jury in Colorado returned a verdict that found the EEOC and the intervenors failed to prove their discrimination claims.   Employers face...

Yesterday, the EEOC issued a new Fact Sheet titled, "What you Should Know About EEOC and the Enforcement Protections for LGBT Workers."  You can find it on the EEOC's website at:  https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/wysk/enforcement_protections_lgbt_workers.cfm Therein, the EEOC tells employers it: interprets Title VII's prohibition against sex discrimination as forbidding any employment discrimination based on gender identity or sexual orientation; will not recognize an employer's reliance on a contrary state or local law as a defense; and will consider a wide range of conduct to be discriminatory, including the failure to use the name and gender pronoun that correspond to the gender identity with which an employee identifies. The EEOC's position that it will not recognize state law to the contrary is certain to result in an increase in litigation.

Employers should be able to expect employees to behave professionally, cooperate with one another, and maintain a positive working environment.  In its continuing attack on employer policies, however, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) recently found that an employer's Workplace Conduct policy requiring those behaviors was unlawful. See T-Mobile USA, Inc. , 363 NLRB No. 171 (April 29, 2016).  The policy at issue read as follows:      [Employer] expects all employees to behave in a professional manner that promotes efficiency, productivity, and cooperation.  Employees are expected to maintain a positive work environment by communicating in a manner that is conducive to effective working relationships with internal and external customers, clients, co-workers, and management.   Disagreeing with an Administrative Law Judge's conclusion that the policy was lawful, and with the employer's argument that the policy reflected bus...