Law Commons^™

Employees As Regulators: The New Private Ordering In High Technology Companies, Jennifer S. Fan

Articles

There is mounting public concern over the influence that high technology companies have in our society. In the past, these companies were lauded for their innovations, but now as one scandal after another has plagued them, from being a conduit in influencing elections (think Cambridge Analytica) to the development of weaponized artificial intelligence, to their own moment of reckoning with the #MeToo movement, these same companies are under scrutiny. Leaders in high technology companies created their own sets of norms through private ordering. Their work was largely unfettered by regulators, with the exception of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s oversight …

Disrupting Adhesion Contracts With #Metoo Innovators, Xuan-Thao Nguyen

Articles

Adhesion contracts are everywhere. Take it or leave it, the dominant party holds the leverage while the weaker party adheres. Ninety percent of employment contracts contain mandatory arbitration clauses, and attempts to challenge arbitration requirements meet with judicial indifference or hostility. Ultimately, arbitration clauses eviscerate the employee's right to a jury trial and access to the court system in general. In recent years, employers in the tech sector have faced unexpected resistance from innovators. Just as innovators are known for disrupting old business models through technological innovations, #MeToo reformers are disrupting the seemingly insurmountable adhesion contract regime. They organize, protest, …

Permitted Incentives For Workplace Wellness Plans Under The Ada And Gina: The Regulatory Gap, Elizabeth Pendo

Articles

Although workplace wellness plans have been around for decades, they have flourished under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“PPACA”) into a $6 billion-dollar industry. Under PPACA, a “wellness plan” is a program of health promotion or disease prevention offered by an employer that is designed to promote health or prevent disease and which meets the other applicable requirements of that subsection. Employers look to these programs to promote healthy lifestyles, improve the overall health of employees and beneficiaries, and reduce rising healthcare costs.

PPACA’s amendments to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (“HIPAA”) permit employers to offer …

Brief In Opposition. Idaho Department Of Corrections V. Fuller, 138 S.Ct. 1345 (2018) (No. 17-959), Eric Schnapper, Ericka Birch, Kass Hartstad

Court Briefs

QUESTION PRESENTED The court of appeals concluded that a reasonable jury could find that actions by supervisors at the Idaho Department of Corrections created a hostile work environment. Petitioner does not seek review of that holding. The question presented is: Did the court of appeals err in concluding that the record contained sufficient evidence to permit a reasonable jury to infer that the actions of those supervisors were gender-based?

Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari. Kirk V. Invesco, Limited, 138 S.Ct. 1164 (2018) (No. 17-762), 2017 U.S. S. Ct. Briefs Lexis 4618, 2017 Wl 5665441, Eric Schnapper, Nitin Sud

Court Briefs

QUESTION PRESENTED The Fair Labor Standards Act provides that covered employees who work more than 40 hours in a week must generally be paid overtime at a rate one and one-half times their regular rate. To assure compliance with that overtime rule, the Act and governing regulations require employers to maintain records of all hours worked by covered employees. If an employer has failed to keep the legally required records, the burden on the employee under Anderson v. Mt. Clemens Pottery Co. is simply to "produce[] sufficient evidence to show the amount and extent of that work as a matter …

Reply Brief. Crouse V. Caldwell, 138 S.Ct. 470 (2017) (No. 17-242), Eric Schnapper, Steven H. Goldblatt, Shon Hopwood, Marybeth Mullaney, Jennifer Munter Stark

Court Briefs

QUESTIONS PRESENTED (1) When disputes of fact arise regarding whether speech by a public employee is protected by the First Amendment, should those factual issues be resolved by a trier of fact (the rule in the Second, Third, Sixth, Eighth and Tenth Circuits), or by the court as a matter of constitutional law (the rule in the Fourth Circuit)? (2) When a government employee engages in speech on a subject of public concern, and a court applying Pickering balances the First Amendment interest against any contrary interests of the employer, should the extent of that First Amendment interest be “lessened” …

Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari, Crouse V. Caldwell, 138 S.Ct. 470 (2017) (No. 17-242), Eric Schnapper, Steven H. Goldblatt, Shon Hopwood, Marybeth Mullaney, Jennifer Munter Stark

Court Briefs

QUESTIONS PRESENTED (1) When disputes of fact arise regarding whether speech by a public employee is protected by the First Amendment, should those factual issues be resolved by a trier of fact (the rule in the Second, Third, Sixth, Eighth and Tenth Circuits), or by the court as a matter of constitutional law (the rule in the Fourth Circuit)? (2) When a government employee engages in speech on a subject of public concern, and a court applying Pickering balances the First Amendment interest against any contrary interests of the employer, should the extent of that First Amendment interest be “lessened” …

Petitioner's Reply Brief. Riley V. Elkhart Community Schools, 137 S.Ct. 1328 (No. 16-533), 2017 U.S. S. Ct. Briefs Lexis 593, 2017 Wl 712023, Eric Schnapper, Robin Remley

Court Briefs

QUESTIONS PRESENTED (1) To establish a prima facie case of discrimination in promotion or hiring, is a plaintiff required to show that the position in question was filled by someone outside his or her protected group? (2) In Patterson v. McLean Credit Union, this Court held that in a case of alleged discrimination in hiring or promotion, a plaintiff “might seek to demonstrate that [the employer's] claim to have promoted a better qualified applicant was pretextual by showing that she was in fact better qualified than the person chosen for the position.” Ash v. Tyson Foods, Inc. recognized that the …

Making The Minimum Wage Work: An Examination Of The Economic Impact Of The Minimum Wage, Steve P. Calandrillo, Taylor Halperin

Articles

With the passage of the Fair Labor Standards Act in 1938, Congress mandated a federal “living wage” in order to “maintain the minimum standard of living necessary for the health, efficiency, and general well-being of workers.” Advocates have long insisted that increases in the minimum wage result in a net gain to employees’ standard of living. Critics have countered that those gains come at the expense of higher prices and shrinking overall employment numbers, leaving a new class of potential workers out in the cold.

This Article synthesizes the empirical economic impact data from minimum wage increases over the past …

Reply Brief. Lavigne V. Cajun Deep Foundations, L.L.C., 137 S.Ct. 1328 (2017) (No. 16-464), 2016 Wl 9443770, Eric Schnapper, J. Arthur Smith, Iii, Justin M. Delaune

Court Briefs

QUESTIONS PRESENTED (1) To establish a prima facie case of discriminatory termination, is a plaintiff required to show that he was replaced by someone outside his or her protected group?* (2) Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, a plaintiff prior to:bringing a civil action must first file a charge with the EEOC, usually within 300 days of the action complained of. The Question Presented is: Where a claimant files a timely Title VII charge asserting that employer conduct was the result of a particular unlawful motive, may the claimant after the end of the charge-filing period …

Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari. Lavigne V. Cajun Deep Foundations, L.L.C., 137 S.Ct. 1328 (2017) (No. 16-464), 2016 Wl 5929996, Eric Schnapper, J. Arthur Smith, Iii, Justin M. Delaune

Court Briefs

QUESTIONS PRESENTED (1) To establish a prima facie case of discriminatory termination, is a plaintiff required to show that he was replaced by someone outside his or her protected group? (2) Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, a plaintiff prior to:bringing a civil action must first file a charge with the EEOC, usually within 300 days of the action complained of. The Question Presented is: Where a claimant files a timely Title VII charge asserting that employer conduct was the result of a particular unlawful motive, may the claimant after the end of the charge-filing period …

Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari. Lavigne V. Cajun Deep Foundations, L.L.C., 137 S.Ct. 1328 (2017) (No. 16-464), 2016 U.S. S. Ct. Briefs Lexis 3646, 2016 Wl 5929996, Eric Schnapper, Ruth W. Woodling

Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

Brief In Opposition. City Of Houston V. Zamora, 136 S.Ct. 2009 (2016) (No. 15-868), 2016 U.S. S. Ct. Briefs Lexis 1615, 2016 Wl 1445907, Eric Schnapper, Kim Ogg, Scott Poerschke, Randall L. Kallinen, Robert Mcknight, Jr.

Court Briefs

QUESTIONS PRESENTED (1) Does the liability standard in Staub v. Proctor Hospital, 562 U.S. 411 (2011), apply to retaliation claims under Title VII? (2) Under Staub, where a supervisor for an unlawful purpose has engaged in conduct that was intended to and did in fact cause an adverse employment action, the existence of an independent investigation by other officials does not limit liability unless that investigation reveals a new basis for that adverse action that is “unrelated” to the conduct of the supervisor. The second question presented is: Should the Court overturn the decision in Staub, and hold that an …

Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari. Flowers V. Troup County School District, 136 S.Ct. 2510 (2016) (No. 15-1144), 2016 Wl 1042969, Eric Schnapper, Ruth W. Woodling

Court Briefs

QUESTION PRESENTED Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc., held in an action under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, that a plaintiff may ordinarily prove the existence of an unlawful motive by establishing a prima facie case and demonstrating the falsity of the employer’s proffered explanation for the disputed employment, and that a plaintiff who does so need not also offer some other additional evidence of discrimination. The Eleventh Circuit held in this Title VII action that the existence of an unlawful motive may not be established in that manner; a plaintiff who establishes a prima facie case and the …

Creative Capitalism And Human Trafficking: A Business Approach To Eliminate Forced Labor And Human Trafficking From Global Supply Chains, Dana Raigrodski

Articles

A great amount of revenue generated by businesses in the global economy can be linked to the trafficking and enslavement of human beings. Yet, the current discourse on human trafficking fails to recognize the magnitude of benefit consumers, businesses, and economies gain from the work of forced and trafficked labor. Moreover, the limited efforts that seek to address this situation have focused on ways to encourage businesses to voluntarily adopt more socially responsible practices. These measures have had only limited success, and are generally believed to be in tension with the for-profit purposes of businesses.

Hence, the task of convincing …

Reasons For Counseling Reasonableness In Deploying Covenants-Not-To-Compete In Technology Firms, Robert W. Gomulkiewicz

Articles

Some states ban the enforcement of employee covenants-not-to-compete (“non-competes”) but most enforce them to the extent they are reasonable. As such, “reasonableness” provides the touchstone for enforceability analysis. The academic literature commenting on the reasonableness of non-competes is large and growing. Scholars usually direct their comments to judges, legislators, and other scholars.

Rarely do they address practicing lawyers. That omission is particularly unfortunate because practicing lawyers, more than judges, legislators, and scholars, can affect whether non-competes work both fairly and effectively. This Article fills that void by providing reasons, directed to practicing lawyers, for deploying non-competes in a reasonable manner. …

Reply Brief For Petitioner. Paske V. Fitzgerald, 136 S.Ct. 536 (2015) (No. 15-162), 2015 U.S. S. Ct. Briefs Lexis 3941, 2015 Wl 6748880, Eric Schnapper, Margaret A. Harris

Court Briefs

QUESTIONS PRESENTED McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green established a common method of analyzing evidence of an unlawful discriminatory motive. If a plaintiff establishes a prima facie case of discrimination, the defendant must articulate a legitimate, non-discriminatory purpose for the disputed action; where the defendant has done so, the plaintiff has the burden of demonstrating that the proffered purpose was a pretext for discrimination. This Court has repeatedly explained that the burden of establishing a prima facie case is “not onerous.” United States Postal Service Board of Governors v. Aikens held, in the context of a case which had gone to …

Brief For Respondents. Tyson Foods, Inc. V. Bouaphakeo, 136 S.Ct. 1036 (2016) (No. 14-1146), 2015 Wl 5634431, David C. Frederick, Derek T. Ho, Matthew A. Seligman, Robert L. Wiggins Jr., Scott Michelman, Scott L. Nelson, Allison M. Zieve, Eric Schnapper

Court Briefs

QUESTIONS PRESENTED

1. Whether, in this class and collective action for wage-and-hour violations arising out of an employer's failure properly to compensate employees for time spent donning and doffing protective equipment and walking between sites where work was performed, the district court abused its discretion in granting certification where plaintiffs proceeded to prove the amount of work they did using individual timesheet evidence and representative proof concerning donning, doffing, and walking times in accordance with Anderson v. Mt. Clemens Pottery Co., 328 U.S. 680 (1946).

2. Whether a class or collective action may be certified when it contains members …

Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari. Paske V. Fitzgerald, 136 S.Ct. 536 (2015) (No. 15-162), 2015 U.S. S. Ct. Briefs Lexis 2659, 2015 Wl 4651685, Eric Schnapper, Margaret A. Harris

Court Briefs

QUESTIONS PRESENTED McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green established a common method of analyzing evidence of an unlawful discriminatory motive. If a plaintiff establishes a prima facie case of discrimination, the defendant must articulate a legitimate, non-discriminatory purpose for the disputed action; where the defendant has done so, the plaintiff has the burden of demonstrating that the proffered purpose was a pretext for discrimination. This Court has repeatedly explained that the burden of establishing a prima facie case is “not onerous.” United States Postal Service Board of Governors v. Aikens held, in the context of a case which had gone to …

Brief Amicus Curiae For The National Employment Lawyers Association In Support Of Petitioner. Green V. Brennan, 136 S.Ct. 1769 (2016) (No. 14-613), 2015 Wl 4381189, Roberta L. Steele, Eric Schnapper

Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

Leaky Covenants-Not-To-Compete As The Legal Infrastructure For Innovation, Robert W. Gomulkiewicz

Articles

The flow of information that naturally occurs when employees change firms plays a vital role in spurring innovation. Numerous law review articles have explored how covenants-not-to-compete (“non-competes”) can impede this important information flow. In 1999 Professor Ronald Gilson published an influential article concluding that California’s ban on non-competes led to the rise of California’s Silicon Valley and the comparative decline of Massachusetts’ high technology corridor known as Route 128. Despite the scholarly praise for California’s approach, most states enforce non-competes that are reasonable.

That may change, however, because many states are re-evaluating their non-compete laws to avoid Gilson’s cautionary tale …

Economic Migration Gone Wrong: Trafficking In Persons Through The Lens Of Gender, Labor, And Globalization, Dana Raigrodski

Articles

This Article argues for an economic analysis of human trafficking which primarily looks at globalization, trade liberalization, and labor migration as the core areas that need to be explored to advance the prevention of human trafficking.

Part I briefly examines the prevailing criminal law enforcement framework regarding human trafficking—both at the international level and in the United States—which stems out of viewing human trafficking as primarily a threat to global security and an underground industry of transnational criminal enterprises. It argues that while criminalization no doubt helped bring much needed attention (and resources) to human trafficking, the narrow criminal law …

Brief For Respondents. Integrity Staffing Solutions, Inc. V. Busk, 135 S.Ct. 513 (2014) (No. 13-433), 2014 Wl 3866627, Mark R. Thierman, Joshua D. Buck, Eric Schnapper

Court Briefs

QUESTIONS PRESENTED

(1) Does the time an hourly employee spends participating in an employer-mandated anti-theft search constitute "work" within the meaning of the Fair Labor Standards Act?

(2) If such a search occurs at the end of the workday, is the employee’s time nonetheless non-compensable as a postliminary activity under the Portal-to-Portal Act?

Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari. Debord V. Mercy Health System Of Kansas, Inc., 134 S. Ct. 2664 (2014) (No. 13-1118), 2014 U.S. S. Ct. Briefs Lexis 1120, Eric Schnapper, Mark A. Buchanan

Court Briefs

QUESTION PRESENTED

Section 704(a) of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 forbids an employer to retaliate against any employee because that worker "opposed" unlawful discrimination.

The question presented is:

Does section 704(a) prohibit retaliation against a worker because of the worker's statements:

(1) only when the statements are made to the worker's own employer or to federal or state anti-discrimination agencies (the rule in the Tenth and Fourth Circuits), or (2) also when the worker's statements are made to any other person (the rule in the First, Second, Third, Fifth, Sixth and Ninth Circuits)?

Reply Brief. Sandifer V. United States Steel Corp., 134 S. Ct. 870 (2014) (No. 12-417), 2013 U.S. S. Ct. Briefs Lexis 3416, Eric Schnapper, Aaron B. Maduff, Michael L. Maduff, Walker R. Lawrence, Robert F. Childs, Jr., Abby Morrow Richardson, David L. Kern

Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

Brief For Petitioners. Sandifer V. United States Steel Corp., 134 S. Ct. 870 (2014) (No. 12-417), 2013 U.S. S. Ct. Briefs Lexis 2320, Eric Schnapper, Aaron B. Maduff, Michael L. Maduff, Walker R. Lawrence, Robert F. Childs, Jr., Abby Morrow Richardson, David L. Kern

Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

Identifying (With) Disability: Using Film To Teach Employment Discrimination, Elizabeth Pendo

Articles

On the first day of class, I tell my Disability Law students that my objective is simple-I want to change the way they see the world. Teaching, writing, and working in disability rights has done that for me, and I want to continue to share that experience with my students. Integrating film into the classroom is one way to invite that change. When used properly, film can enhance coverage and discussion of substantive legal concepts and important policy issues surrounding employment of people with disabilities. That result is especially important to my objective, because employment and other issues critical to …

Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari. Sandifer V. United States Steel Corp., 134 S. Ct. 870 (2014) (No. 12-417), 2012 U.S. S. Ct. Briefs Lexis 4304, Eric Schnapper, Aaron B. Maduff, Michael L. Maduff, Walker R. Lawrence, Robert F. Childs, Jr., Abby Morrow Richardson, David L. Kern

Court Briefs

QUESTIONS PRESENTED

Under the Fair Labor Standards Act, the period of time during which a covered employee must be paid begins when the worker engages in a principal activity. Donning and doffing safety gear (including protective clothing) required by the employer is a principal activity when it is an integral and indispensable part of the activities for which the worker is employed. Such requirements are common in manufacturing firms. However, under section 203(o) of the Act an employer need not compensate a worker for time spent in “changing clothes” (even if it is a principal activity) if that time is …

Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari. Brush V. Sears Holding Corp., 568 U.S. 1143 (2013) (No. 12-268), 2013 U.S. Lexis 925, Eric W. Scharf, Wayne R. Atkins, Eric Schnapper, Brian D. Buckstein

Court Briefs

QUESTION PRESENTED

Section 704(a) of Title VII prohibits an employer from retaliating against an employee because he or she opposed discrimination forbidden by Title VII. The lower courts are divided as to how such anti-retaliation provisions apply to management officials, such as personnel or EEO officials, whose duties include assuring compliance with Title VII or implementing an employer’s anti-discrimination policy.

The question presented is: Are management officials: (1) subject to exclusion from protection under section 704(a) if their actions are within the scope of their official duties (the rule in the Fifth, Eighth, Tenth and Eleventh Circuits),
(2) protected under …

Review Of Labor And Employment Law Decisions From The United States Supreme Court's 2010-11 Term, Eric Schnapper

Articles

In the 2010-11 term, the U.S. Supreme Court decided nine significant labor and employment cases. Although some of these cases affected only the construction of a specific statute or constitutional provision, several of them addressed issues likely to affect the interpretation and implementation of a wide range of federal employment laws. Most of these decisions, rather than definitively resolving a question, raise a range of new issues likely to be litigated for years to come. Thus, for practitioners and academics alike, recognizing the new questions that have now been raised is at least as important as understanding what matters the …