Labor & Employment Law Update

While incorporating diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) into the corporate culture is not something that is new, it is something that has become increasingly important and complex. Activist consumers are leveraging their purchasing power, public and private contractors are requiring DEI efforts, and an increasing amount of legislation is being promulgated to govern employment practices related to compensation, hiring and employment. This trifecta makes navigating internal and external pressures challenging. In order to successfully navigate these waters, more and more companies are conducting internal DEI audits to analyze their culture, processes and procedures and implement targeted improvements when problems are identified. Although conducting internal DEI audits is incredibly important to building an inclusive culture, doing so without the aid of counsel is fraught with risk and can result in a legal nightmare.

The Chicago Human Rights Ordinance makes it a civil rights violation “[f]or any employer, employee, agent of any employer, employment agency or labor organization to engage in sexual harassment.”  Municipal Code of Chicago, 6-010-040. As we previously discussed in a blog, last year, Chicago’s City Council amended the Chicago Human Rights Ordinance by expanding the definition of sexual harassment and adding various requirements related to harassment prevention training, policy, postings and recordkeeping.

Join Amundsen Davis attorneys Peter Hansen and Laurie Meyer for a webcast on May 31 at 12:00 PM CT to discuss recent changes to, and a comparison of, Illinois and Wisconsin employment laws, along with recent developments in Federal employment laws.

Several recent changes impacting employers in jurisdictions across the nation are summarized below. Many states and municipalities have increased their hourly minimum wage rates, some to as high as $18.07 per hour. Read the full article to determine whether any of these changes apply to you! 

On May 1, 2023, the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB” or “Board”) issued a decision, Lion Elastomers LLC, that provides employees with extensive cover for inappropriate workplace behavior under the guise of the National Labor Relations Act (the “Act”). Moving forward, employers must carefully scrutinize the environment and circumstances under which bad employee behavior occurs and analyze whether levying consequences for such behavior could land it in hot water under the Act.

Last month, the Illinois Department of Labor (“IDOL”) fairly quietly released amended regulations affecting the interpretation and enforcement of the Illinois Wage Payment and Collection Act (“IWPCA”). A complete listing of the amendments appears on the Illinois Secretary of State website. (starting at p.5406).

There seems to be an almost daily litany of layoffs by large corporations that instantly become media fodder. For example, McDonald’s recent layoff, widely reported to have impacted hundreds of white collar employees, comes on the heels of mass layoffs by Amazon, Meta, and Disney. Given this climate, it is best for employers to take a look at their policies and procedures for terminating employees, whether individually or as part of a larger reduction in force to ensure compliance with state and federal law.

The National Labor Relations Board, as currently constituted, continues its efforts to kneecap employers who dare to resist unionization efforts. We have already seen NLRB General Counsel, Jennifer Abruzzo’s, scorched-earth approach to promote unionization through enforcement activities targeting employer conduct that for decades has been perfectly lawful, and then suddenly finding the same conduct to be unlawful and unfair labor practices (including attempting to remove employers’ rights to require a secret-ballot election, instead of accepting authorization cards, to determine union support by a majority of employees; and making it unlawful for employers to hold group meetings with employees during union organizing campaigns to educate employees about the union and the collective bargaining process). Now, not only is conduct that previously has been considered lawful been deemed unlawful, the NLRB is promoting enhanced penalties and damages for employers who commit unfair labor practices.

Proactive employers are well-versed in safeguarding against workplace discrimination based on race, gender, religion, age, or disability. But, what about lesser known forms of prohibited workplace discrimination like genetic information discrimination? The Federal Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) and its Illinois counterpart, Genetic Information Protection Act (GIPA), both prohibit employers from disclosing genetic information or basing any employment decision on an employee’s genetic information. Both statutes contain private rights of action for violations. GIPA, however, contains a statutory damages provision that provides for penalties of $2,500 for each negligent violation, and $15,000 for each intentional or reckless violation. With these severe consequences for non-compliance in mind, we answer some questions on these statutes.

A prior article reviewed a decision of the Wisconsin Supreme Court which dealt with the relationship between the workplace and an applicant’s prior domestic violence convictions (Cree, Inc., v. LIRC).  This article will discuss a case which followed later in 2022, a decision of the Wisconsin Court of Appeals in Vega v. LIRC, et al.,  2021 AP 24, Petition for Review Denied, which dealt with whether an employee’s admission to his employer of the facts underlying two felony deferred prosecution agreements for sexual assault could serve as an independent basis to terminate the employment of the employee.