Third Thursday--C&M's March Labor & Employment Update: Compensable Work
Event | 03.20.14, 12:00 AM UTC - 12:00 AM UTC
Please join us for the next edition of Third Thursday – Crowell & Moring's Labor and Employment Update, a webinar series dedicated to helping our clients stay on top of developing law and emerging compliance issues. This month's program covers a difficult wage and hour question. Employers continue to struggle over the definition of what constitutes “compensable work” and the corresponding duty to pay for certain activities performed before and after the normal work day. The Supreme Court’s decision earlier this week to review the Ninth Circuit’s controversial decision in Integrity Staffing Solutions, Inc. v. Busk illustrates the problem. Busk presents the specific question of whether time spent waiting to undergo a security check following work must be compensated.
The Supreme Court’s decision last month in Sandifer v. U.S. Steel, which addressed the question of compensability of time spent donning and doffing clothing (including protective gear) provides additional guidance in this area, along with a challenge to commonly-held beliefs regarding the FLSA’s “de minimis” rule. Our panelists will lead a roundtable discussion of these two cases and other recent developments in this emerging area of wage and hour law.
This webinar is scheduled for Thursday, March 20, at 12:00 pm Eastern Time. We hope that you can join us for this timely and lively discussion.
Please click here to listen to a recording of the webinar. Please click here for a copy of the presentation.
For more information, please visit these areas: Litigation and Trial, Labor and Employment
Participants
Insights
Event | 02.20.25
Has the Buss Stopped? Recoupment Today
Has the Buss Stopped? Recoupment Today: In 1997, the California Supreme Court decided Buss v. Superior Court. In Buss, the court concluded that a liability insurer that defended a mixed action could seek reimbursement from the insured for the defense costs associated with the claims that were not even potentially covered. Since then, numerous courts have held that insurers are entitled to recoup their defense costs associated with uncovered claims or causes of action. On the other hand, a significant number of courts have rejected insurers’ right to recoupment, at least in the absence of a policy provision granting the insurer that right. Some commentators have even suggested that the current judicial trend might be away from permitting insurers to recoup their defense costs. Is that correct? Has the Buss stopped? This panel of coverage experts will analyze insurers’ claimed right to recoupment today, and offer their perspectives on what the law on recoupment should perhaps be and might be in the future.
Event | 12.05.24
Event | 12.03.24
