Law Commons^™

Labor Law's Impact On The Post-Dobbs Workplace, Jeffrey M. Hirsch

Employee Rights and Employment Policy Journal

The Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision has left many workers, especially in states with restrictive abortion-related laws, in a precarious position. Labor laws and unions, however, provide one avenue for providing these workers with more protections. Unions can demand bargaining to protect or expand health care, leave, and other terms of employment that give workers with means to obtain abortion-related care. Unions can also provide members legal defense and other support if they face prosecutions. Additionally, both union and non-union workers who make up the vast majority of workers in states with restrictive laws may have labor law protection for discussing …

Pro-Choice Plans, Brendan S. Maher

Faculty Scholarship

After Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the United States Constitution may no longer protect abortion, but a surprising federal statute does. That statute is called the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), and it has long been one of the most powerful preemptive statutes in the entire United States Code. ERISA regulates “employee benefit plans,” which are the vehicle by which approximately 155 million people receive their health insurance. Plans are thus a major private payer for health benefits—and therefore abortions. While many post-Dobbs anti-abortion laws directly bar abortion by making either the receipt or provision of …

Qualified Sovereignty, Kate Sablosky Elengold, Jonathan D. Glater

Washington Law Review

Sometimes acts of the federal government cause harm; sometimes acts of contractors hired by the federal government cause harm. In cases involving the latter, federal contractors often invoke the sovereign’s constitutionally granted and doctrinally expanded supremacy to restrict avenues for the injured to recover even from private actors. In prior work, we analyzed how federal contractors exploit three “sovereign shield” defenses—preemption, derivative sovereign immunity, and derivative intergovernmental immunity—to evade liability, accountability, and oversight.

This Article considers whether, when, and how private federal contractors should be held accountable in a court of law. We argue that a contractor should be required …

How Can Federal Actors Compete On Noncompetes? Examining The Need For And Possibility Of Federal Action On Noncompetition Agreements, Robert Mcavoy

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

Employees have been frustrated by the restrictiveness of noncompete agreements and confused about their enforceability for decades. The added complication of choice-of-law provisions in employment contracts with noncompetes creates a sea of unpredictability for both employees and employers.

Each state applies its own policy to noncompete agreements. While every state treats noncompetes differently than typical contract provisions, a broad spectrum exists between the states that are friendly and those that are hostile to the enforcement of noncompetes. Employees and employers often fail to understand whether their noncompete is enforceable under the jurisdiction chosen by the contract, and courts override choice-of-law …

But We Didn’T Agree To That!: Why Class Proceedings Should Not Be Implied From Silent Or Ambiguous Arbitration Clauses After Lamps Plus, Inc. V. Varela, Andrea Demelo Laprade

Catholic University Law Review

The application of class arbitrability when a contract is silent on the matter remains a mystery. The Supreme Court has not clarified its stance on class arbitrability and preemptive effects of the Federal Arbitration Act on state law when applied to determine if class arbitrability is available. The purpose of this Paper is to address how the Lamps Plus v. Varela decision created more confusion about the question of class arbitrability. It argues that the failure to address the particulars of the availability of class arbitration will perpetuate litigation on this issue. This Paper suggests that the FAA’s purpose supports …

Nothing Is Inevitable: A Rejection Of The Inevitable Disclosure Doctrine Under The Defend Trade Secrets Act, Jacqueline R. Mancini

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

Until June 2013, Manish Desai worked for Molon Motor and Coil Corporation (“Molon”) as Head of Quality Control. In June of that year, Desai left Molon to take a position with a competitor of Molon, Nidec Motor Corporation (“Nidec”). Molon brought suit against Nidec for trade secret misappropriation and alleged that Desai copied confidential information onto a flash drive before his departure. Based on these allegations, Molon argued not only that Desai unlawfully disclosed its trade secrets but also that “Nidec used and continues to use that information.” Molon brought suit under the federal Defend Trade Secrets Act and …

Erisa Preemption After Gobeille V. Liberty Mutual: Completing The Retrenchment Of Shaw, Edward A. Zelinsky

Hofstra Labor & Employment Law Journal

Gobeille v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. is the U.S.Supreme Court’s most recent preemption decision under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA). In Gobeille, the Court completed the process of reconciling the restrained approach to ERISA preemption announced in New York State Conference of Blue Cross & Blue Shield Plans v. Travelers Insurance Co. with the Court’s literal and expansive approach adopted earlier in Shaw v. Delta Air Lines, Inc. Gobeille consummated this reconciliation by confirming the sub silentio retrenchment of Shaw and its “plain language” approach in favor of Traveler’s broader construction of ERISA preemption.

Gobeille held …

The Effect Of Pegram V. Herdrich On Hmo Liability, Dawn Marie Kelly

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Nlra Preemption Of State Common Law Wrongful Discharge Claims: The Bhopal Brigade Goes Home , Joseph R. Weeks

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Health Care Providers Meet Erisa: Are Provider Claims For Misrepresentation Of Coverage Preempted, Jeffrey A. Brauch

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Undocumented Workers And Concepts Of Fault: Are Courts Engaged In Legitimate Decisionmaking, Christine N. Cimini

Articles

This Article examines judicial decisionmaking in labor and employment cases involving undocumented workers. Labor and employment laws, designed to protect all workers regardless of immigration status, often conflict with immigration laws designed to deter the employment of undocumented workers. In the absence of clarity as to how these differing policy priorities should interact, courts are left to resolve the conflict. While existing case law appears to lack coherence, this Article identifies a uniform judicial reliance upon “fault-based” factors. This Article offers a structure to understand this developing body of law and evaluates the legitimacy of the fault-based decisionmaking modalities utilized …

Texas Elective Workers' Compensation: A Model Of Innovation?, Jason Ohana

William & Mary Business Law Review

Workers' Compensation is often described as a bargain between employers and employees. Employees give up the right to sue their employers in negligence for workplace injuries, and, in return, employers agree to pay predictable, statutorily mandated benefits to injured employees. Over time, this “bargain” became compulsory in every state but one. Texas is the only state in which employers and employees can decide whether or not to enter the workers' compensation bargain. This elective system has some fairly serious problems, and many have advocated its abandonment. This Note analyzes the system's history, compares the system to conventional compulsory systems, analyzes …

Erisa Preemption Doctrine As Health Policy, Joshua P. Booth, Larry I. Palmer

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Federal Employer Sanctions As Immigration Federalism, Darcy M. Pottle

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

For low-skilled workers in much of the world, U.S. admission policies make illegal immigration the most viable means of entering the country. Low average schooling, which disqualifies many potential immigrants from employment-based visas, and long queues affecting family preference immigration from high-traffic countries, make the admission criteria outlined in the U.S. Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) prohibitive for most would-be immigrants to the United States. Perhaps due to this failure of immediate legal avenues, many immigrants enter the country illegally. Though many eventually gain legal status, in the meantime they live and work in the United States without documentation. "Illegal …

The Legal Arizona Workers Act And Preemption Doctrine, Sandra J. Durkin

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

in recent years, a spate of states passed laws regulating the employment of undocumented immigrants. This Note argues that laws that impose civil sanctions on employers that hire undocumented immigrants are preempted by both federal immigration law and federal labor law. The Note focuses specifically on the Legal Arizona Workers Act because it went into effect in 2008 and has amassed more than two years' worth of data on its enforcement, and because it is touted as the harshest state anti-immigration measure to date. This Note examines the law's impacts and argues that practitioners nationwide should challenge the Legal Arizona …

The Role Of Erisa Preemption In Health Reform: Opportunities And Limits, Peter D. Jacobson

O'Neill Institute Papers

The Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) is a federal law regulating the administration of private employer-sponsored benefits including health benefits (i.e., health insurance offered by an employer). In general, since the federal government has exercised its authority to preempt state regulation of the administration of private employer-sponsored health plans, states are blocked from enforcing laws interfering with ERISA.

As many states pursue health care reform experiments, ERISA preemption becomes relevant as a potential limit on the scope and type of reforms states are able to enact. The dominant trend in ERISA litigation has been to preempt state legislation and …

Ask, Don’T Tell: Ethical Issues Surrounding Undocumented Workers’ Status In Employment Litigation, Christine N. Cimini

Articles

The presence of an estimated 11.5 million undocumented immigrants in the United States, of which an estimated 7.2 million are working, has become a flashpoint in the emerging national debate about immigration. Given these statistics, it is not surprising that many undocumented workers suffer injuries in the workplace that are typically legally cognizable. Even though undocumented workers are entitled to a number of legal remedies related to their employment, seeking legal relief often raises heightened concerns about the disclosure of their status. This article explores lawyers' increasingly complex ethical obligations with regard to a client's immigration status in the context …

The New Massachusetts Health Law: Preemption And Experimentation, Edward A. Zelinsky

William & Mary Law Review

The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) preempts major features of the new Massachusetts health law. Although regrettable, this conclusion is mandated by ERISA's statutory terminology and the controlling case law. Other states, in fashioning their health care policies, are looking at elements of the new Massachusetts law. Just as ERISA preempts the individual and business contribution mandates of the Massachusetts statute, ERISA will preempt any similar provisions adopted by other states.

Because state experimentation with health care is particularly desirable today, Congress should, at a minimum, amend ERISA to validate the new Massachusetts health law. More comprehensively, …

Days Without Immigrants: Analysis And Implications Of The Treatment Of Immigration Rallies Under The National Labor Relations Act, Michael C. Duff

All Faculty Scholarship

The massive immigration rallies of early 2006 were prompted by anticipated congressional action classifying all unauthorized workers as felons subject to immediate deportation. While a product of federal immigration policy, the rallies implicate federal labor law because they could be characterized as concerted employee action resulting in a series of work stoppages.

Some employees were discharged for missing work to attend the rallies, so an initial question is whether participation in the rallies is protected activity under the National Labor Relations Act. But even assuming the rallies were attended by unauthorized workers, those workers are undeniably employees within the meaning …

The Use Of Hiring Preferences By Alaska Native Corporations After Malabed V. North Slope Borough, James P. Mills

Seattle University Law Review

This article argues that Native corporations can provide employment preferences for Alaska Natives, so long as they are appropriately tailored to provide employment preferences to that corporation's shareholders or those closely related to the shareholders. Moreover, a hiring preference based on shareholder status is not a preference based on race and, as such, does not violate Alaska state law.24 But even if the Alaska Supreme Court found that these hiring preferences did violate the state constitution, given the federal government's unique relationship with Native corporations 25 and Congress's clear intent for Native corporations to favor Alaska Natives in their hiring …

To Preempt Or Not To Preempt: Hmo Liability Pre And Post Pegram V. Herdrich , Adam D. Glassman

Journal of Law and Health

Should consumers have the right to sue their HMOs (health maintenance organizations) for the way they deliver medical care? In recent years, the federal courts have focused their attention upon, inter alia, the issue of whether HMOs have a duty to reveal financial incentive provisions contained in contracts between the HMO plan physicians to plan members and beneficiaries under a health plan. In fact, on June 12, 2000, the United States Supreme Court, in Pegram v. Herdrich, pondered whether HMO physicians and administrators are fiduciaries under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), and if so, must they exercise their …

Smith V. Bates Technical College: Washington Extends The Availability Of The Tort Of Wrongful Discharge In Violation Of Public Policy, But A Little Too Far: Employees Should Still Exhaust Other Remedies, Richard A. Morris

Seattle University Law Review

This Note will present and analyze two significant issues addressed by the Smith court. First, the court properly decided that state common law claims are not preempted by collective bargaining agreements or available administrative procedures. Second, the court incorrectly determined that exhaustion of administrative or contractual remedies is not a prerequisite to seeking tort relief in court. The judiciary should give deference to administrative or contractual procedures specifically designed to resolve the matter in dispute. This Note will analyze the preemption issue by first examining, in Part II, the general function of common law torts, the doctrine of employment-at-will, and …

No Harm, No Fraud: The Invalidity Of State Fraud Claims Brought Against Employment Testers, Robert T. Roos

Vanderbilt Law Review

In the summer of 1995, two female African-American students at Northwestern University began their summer jobs as part of the Legal Assistance Foundation of Chicago's ("LAFC") employment discrimination testing project.' The women, Kyra Kyles and Lolita Pierce, were hired as employment "testers" for the project, where they were to gather data about Chicago-area employers by taking part in the application process for numerous potential jobs. As part of the testing process, the project manager paired Kyles and Pierce with two white female LAFC employees, forming a pair of interviewing teams that each consisted of one African-American tester and one white …

Erisa Section 104(B)(4): What Documents Do Employees Have A Right To Demand From Their Employers?, Anne-Marie M. Miles

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Preemption Between The Poles: Erisa's Effect On State Common Law Actions Other Than Benefit Claims, Troy A. Price

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Employer's Fetal Injury Quandary After Johnson Controls, Susan Grover

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Legacy Of Industrial Pluralism: The Tension Between Individual Employment Rights And The New Deal Collective Bargaining System, Katherine V.W. Stone

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Section 301'S Preemption Of State Law Claims: A Model For Analysis, Rebecca White

Scholarly Works

Congress, in section 301(a) of the Labor Management Relations Act, has provided a cause of action for breach of a collective bargaining agreement. This statute has long been interpreted as ousting state law claims for breach of contract when the contract involved is a collective bargaining agreement.

To what extent Congress, in enacting section 301, intended to foreclose other state law claims by the parties to or the individuals covered by a collective bargaining agreement is an issue that has recently gained prominence. The Supreme Court has decided four such cases unanimously in the last four years.

Such contemporary and …

Unions And Urinalysis, Deborah A. Schmedemann

Faculty Scholarship

Many private employers seem to be busy deciding whether and how to test employees for drug use. Presumably most of these decisions are made by management acting alone. However, in unionized workplaces—one out of five private sector employees are represented by unions—federal labor law prescribes a different method. That method features collective bargaining by unions and management to set the rules, the use of a private third-party neutral to resolve disputes which arise under those rules (arbitration), and relatively little involvement by the government (the National Labor Relations Board, legislatures, and the courts). This system that labor law prescribes for …

The Labor Preemption Doctrine: Hamiltonian Renaissance Or Last Hurrah?, David L. Gregory

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.