Insights

Washington, D.C. – June 29, 2016: On June 28, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari in Prime Healthcare Services, Inc. v. SEIU, upholding the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision in favor of SEIU, Crowell & Moring client Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, and related organizations. In the matter, Prime Healthcare Services, Inc. alleged an antitrust conspiracy between a health care workers' union and Kaiser to eliminate a competing hospital services provider from the market and asserted related monopolization claims against Kaiser.

Washington, D.C. – January 17, 2013: Crowell & Moring LLP is pleased to announce it has elected seven attorneys to the firm's partnership effective January 1, 2013. The firm has also promoted three attorneys to the position of senior counsel, and nine associates to the position of counsel. The new partners, senior counsel, and counsel have been promoted from within the ranks of the firm's Washington, D.C., San Francisco, Brussels, and London offices.

Over the past several years, federal courts have increasingly questioned the authority of administrative law judges (ALJs) to adjudicate alleged violations of certain labor and employment statutes.  In the last several weeks, two U.S. district courts in Texas issued decisions halting unfair labor practice proceedings before the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) on the grounds that NLRB ALJs lack the constitutional authority to preside over such actions due to unconstitutional protections against their removal.[1]  Similarly, the last year has seen several decisions by courts in the Fifth and Eleventh Circuits finding that ALJs, whose decisions are not reviewable by a Presidential appointee, lack constitutional authority under the Appointments Clause to adjudicate claims.[2]  The trend illustrated by these decisions, combined with the Supreme Court’s decision in June to abandon the Chevron doctrine of extending deference to federal agency rule-making proceedings, portend significant changes in the way employers interact with federal agencies that enforce labor and employment law. 

On June 13, 2024, The Supreme Court ruled in Starbucks v. McKinney that the National Labor Relations Board (“Board”) must meet the same four-part test that other litigants must satisfy in order to obtain a preliminary injunction. This holding resolves a split amongst the circuit courts, some of which have applied a “less exacting” two-factor test to preliminary injunctions under Section 10(j) of the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”).

On January 10, 2024, the U.S. Department of Labor (“DOL”) published its final rule on Employee or Independent Contractor Classification under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”). Crowell & Moring previously reported on the proposed rule announced on October 11, 2022. The final rule rescinds the “core factors” independent contractor rule adopted by the Trump administration in 2021 and returns to a “totality of the circumstances” analysis for determining whether a worker is properly classified as an employee or independent contractor. According to the DOL, the new final rule institutes an analysis that better aligns with judicial precedent and the FLSA’s text and purpose. The final rule goes into effect on March 11, 2024.

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.

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, emerging compliance issues, and best practices.

Please join members of Crowell & Moring’s Labor & Employment group for an update on the potential impact of the Biden Administration’s policies and priorities for U.S. employers. Our panel will review new senior presidential appointments, pending congressional legislation, and other regulatory developments.

As COVID-19 infections continue to mount, reports of employees becoming increasingly concerned about having to report to worksites across the country in service of essential businesses are escalating. Anxious employees are refusing to come to work, and in some cases, have already lodged formal complaints in court and with relevant agencies, notwithstanding the myriad efforts undertaken by their employers both to adhere to CDC guidance and implement wide ranging safety measures.