Search

For many workers, taking time of from work for a serious health condition or to care for a family member's serious health condition is complicated. Since 1993, tbe Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) bas provided job protection for workers wbo take leave. Howeven not all workers are covered. This Comment looks at where the FMLA comes up short, bow some states are providing broader coverage and more robust benefits, and advocates for states to continue improving upon tbe FMLA baseline. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Courts have long tried to force employee benefit plan relationships into the pigeonholes of donative trust law. Scholars have bemoaned the results. In Thole v. U.S. Bank, the Supreme Court recently perverted bedrock fiduciary principles when it held that pension plan participants did not have standing to bring fiduciary claims alleging violations of prudence and loyalty associated with self-dealing and the loss of almost $750 million in plan assets. It is past time to bring a new lens to bear on the challenges of building plan governance mechanisms that will enable U.S. workers to accumulate the financial resources they need for a secure retirement and decrease the social safety net costs of supporting superannuated individuals. This Article breaks new ground by building an agency costs model to conceptualize the relationship between benefit plan sponsors and plan participants. The model enables normative insights on how governance mechanisms may mitigate agency costs. It also illuminates how these normative insights can be used to improve positive law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

According to a 2016 Time magazine article, over 45 million people currently work in the "gig," "on demand," or "sharing" economy. In the past ten years, 94 percent of net new jobs have appeared outside of traditional employment. The gig economy presents a paradox for workers in the United States. On its face, the gig economy represents the height of liberty. Part-time, temporary, and platform workers are not tied to any single employer and can theoretically choose when to work and whom they want to work for. However, while workers in the gig economy enjoy nominal autonomy, they also lack many protections to which employees are legally entitled. Gig economy workers lack job security and must constantly search for new work. Most gig economy workers do not receive health insurance, pensions, or other benefits from their employers. The reality of the gig economy is greater economic inequality, insecurity, and precarity. The recent COVID-19 pandemic has exposed this reality and heightened the vulnerability of gig economy workers. Despite the promise of liberty in the gig economy, workers are increasingly subject to a new form of peonage: exploitative practices reminiscent of slavery and involuntary servitude. This Article starts from firsthand accounts and empirical research and applies an interdisciplinary approach to understanding what liberty of contract means, and can mean, to workers in the gig economy. It explores the ideology of the liberty of contract and presents an alternative approach: the freedom from undue coercion promised by the Thirteenth Amendment. This is the first article to consider what the Thirteenth Amendment could mean for gig economy workers. It draws on the work of labor scholars who have largely focused on the question of whether gig economy workers should be classified as employees, and constitutional scholars exploring what the promise of liberty in the Thirteenth Amendment means for US workers. The Thirteenth Amendment offers a promise to these workers--a promise of freedom from undue coercion. However, that promise has yet to be enforced. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2018, the Supreme Court of California held in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court that the ABC test for distinguishing between employees and independent contractors under state wage and hour laws should supplant its common law approach. As a result, California codified the decision as Assembly Bill 5 (AB 5). The adoption of the ABC test stands to benefit workers and have considerable effects on California's economy. This Comment argues that courts should follow the Supreme Court of California's example by shifting away from outdated common law doctrine to tackle emerging societal problems and propel legislative change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent court decisions and legislation have paved the way for companies with defined-benefit plans to reduce benefits to retirees either by more easily transferring their pension plan obligations to the beleaguered Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation or by freezing their plans. Both of these increasingly likely events put existing retirement plans in jeopardy as a major portion of the retirement cash flow is represented by these defined-benefit plans. The purpose of this paper is to make the case that planners need to take this probability into consideration and to suggest ways for addressing it with their clients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Executives should be aware that the American Jobs Creation Act, which became law in late 2004, has significantly changed the rules for nonqualified deferred compensation plans, including individual contracts, bonus arrangements, stock options and stock appreciation rights, and severance pay plans. Changes limit the initial elections, funding, and distributions from such arrangements. Executives are cautioned to review every arrangement that may be covered by the new rules, consider any grandfather rules that may be available, and make appropriate decisions to change (or in some cases, to terminate) their arrangements before the end of 2005. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Focuses on the employee benefit aspects of the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 of the United States. New tax rates and increases in contribution limits; New types of contributions; Tax incentives for retirement plans; Rules of distributions, loans, and rollovers; Reduced regulatory burdens; Enhanced educational benefits; Tax credits for on-site child-care facilities.

Discusses the features of the Employee Plans Compliance Resolution Systems instituted by the US Internal Revenue Service. Changes made to existing programs that were developed as experimental alternatives to plan disqualification; Comprehensive system of correction programs for plan sponsors that failed to meet qualification requirements; Important terms contained in the program.

The article discusses the exemption of hospitals controlled or owned by religious entities from the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) based on a court ruling in the 2017 case Advocate Health Care Network v. Stapleton in the U.S. Topics discussed include the definition of principle purpose organization, exemption of qualified church plans from funding requirements of ERISA and the Internal Revenue Code, and impact on the employee benefit industry.

The article discusses various developments involving the legal aspects of employee benefit plans, the U.S. Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), and employers, and it mentions non-ERISA corporate lawyers in America. Legal compliance is examined, along with America's Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, a U.S. Department of Labor fiduciary rule, and U.S. Internal Revenue Code Section 403(b) plans.

While electorates and governments struggle to assess the difficult technical and political issues of nuclear armament and, especially, the testing of such weapons, the radiation hazard of industrial uses of atomic products has become a fact for an increasing number of workers. Industrial applications of radioactive isotopes and nuclear energy are multiplying rapidly and the number of workers exposed to the risk of illness and death from such sources also appears to be increasing. Under private use, workers injured and disabled by radiation must seek the protection of state workmen's compensation laws for medical and economic rehabilitation. In this discussion, the author examines the reasons for growing concern over radiation as an occupational hazard and analyzes four basic issues which radiation disease presents for state workmen's compensation laws. In general, he finds that only a few of these laws approach recommended standards of protection; under a number of laws, workers injured by exposure to radiation actually receive protection and benefits less favorable than those available to the victims of more "conventional" industrial accidents and disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although the drafters of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 ("ERISA") likely could not have anticipated the data security issues of the twenty-first century, ERISA's duty of prudence almost certainly requires employee benefit plan fiduciaries to protect sensitive participant data in at least some manner. This Article suggests the Department of Labor should issue a regulation clarifying fiduciaries' data security obligations. Given that fiduciaries are in the best positions to recognize their plans' individual security needs and capabilities, the regulation should not attempt to micromanage fiduciaries' substantive data security policies; rather, it should focus on the procedures by which they adopt their substantive policies. In addition to promoting specially tailored policies for protecting sensitive participant data, this regulation would resolve much of the confusion surrounding the application of ERISA to the data security field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article describes U.S. Supreme Court precedent from other contexts that affords forum-selection clauses presumptive enforceability, arguing that inapplicable to venue clauses in Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) plans. Topics covered include the judicial history of respect for contractual venue clauses and their intersection with ERISA, and analyses of cases that highlight arguments in favor of and against respecting venue clauses in employee benefit plans.

Sweden has been long known for its early introduction of parental leave in the 1970s and the introduction of the first nontransferable “daddy month” in 1995 while the United Kingdom (UK) lagged behind with policies that reflected a strong male breadwinner model until the recent introduction of Additional Paternity Leave, which extended paternity leave up to twenty-six weeks. Our study examines parental leave decisions following the changes in policy, paying particular attention to the role of partners and workplaces. We draw on data from thirty-two interviews with Swedish parents conducted in 2008 and twenty-two interviews with British parents conducted in 2012. We find that mothers in both countries have great influence over parental leave decisions. However, this often perpetuates a much greater gendered division of parental leave in the UK than in Sweden. Furthermore, the British workplace continues to hold very different expectations for male and female employees regarding parental leave, while Swedish employers are generally accepting of men’s use of long parental leave. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The 1993 Family and Medical Leave Act ("FMLA") provides eligible workers with twelve weeks of unpaid leave. Because the FMLA excludes most short-term illnesses, workers suffering from the flu or similar illnesses still go to work while sick. This phenomenon, referred to as presenteeism, poses a risk to public health and reduces workplace productivity. Some states and cities have adopted paid sick time laws, but other states have adopted preemption laws prohibiting local paid sick time legislation. The Healthy Families Act ("HFA"), which proposes federally-mandated, employer-provided paid sick days for all employees in businesses of fifteen employees or more, would resolve this battle over paid sick days. Despite being repeatedly re-introduced in Congress over the last decade, the HFA has yet to gain sufficient political momentum to move beyond subcommittee. This Note argues that the HFA, the best means of reducing presenteeism in the workplace, should be re-worked to accommodate businesses' concerns, including cost and employee abuse. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the developments in employee benefits law from October 1, 2015, through September 30, 2016 . Topics discussed include decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in the case Gobeille v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. on health insurance under the U.S. Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), Amgen Inc. v. Harris with claim for breach of the duty of prudence and mentions the rule from U.S. Department of Labor on financial investment advisors.

Under the employer mandate of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act ("ACA"), applicable large employers who fail to provide affordable, minimum-level health coverage to their full-time employees must pay a substantial tax. This creates an incentive for certain employers to engage in workforce management techniques, including reducing the hours of full-time employees, to avoid the cost of providing minimum-level health coverage or paying the tax. Certain employees at the receiving end of such methods--particularly hours cuts--may be able to raise viable challenges under section 510 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, but such plaintiffs will also face a variety of challenges. This Article discusses the employer mandate, the use of workforce management techniques by certain employers to avoid compliance, doctrinal issues relating to section 510 claims, and the first section 510 lawsuit challenging ACA workforce restructuring (which has overcome a motion to dismiss). In light of this discussion, the Article reaches several conclusions regarding the viability of using section 510 to challenge ACA-motivated workforce restructuring, especially reductions of employee hours. Most viable plaintiffs, prior to the adverse action, will have worked full-time for an employer with an existing plan. Plaintiffs' biggest hurdle will be proving specific intent to interfere with benefit rights. Plaintiffs who cannot do so with direct evidence may struggle to do so with circumstantial evidence--as this will require demonstrating that the employer's claim to have cut hours in an effort to lower overall labor costs was pretextual. However, if plaintiffs do prevail, they can avail themselves of several meaningful remedies, including injunctive relief equitable restitution, and possibly surcharge. While President-Elect Donald Trump and the G.O.P. plan to "repeal and replace" the ACA, the process of rolling back this complex and politically explosive law may take years, such that the legal issues raised in the Article are unlikely to disappear overnight. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the Oklahoma Supreme Court case Vasquez v. Dillard's Inc. and mentions legislations related to worker's compensation. Topics discussed include brief background of opt-out laws, noting, among other things of Oklahoma Constitution, the issue of the constitutionality of opt-out laws, concluding with an account of the Vasquez case, and critique of opt-out, characterizing this dramatic retraction of social insurance benefits as highly unsatisfactory.

The article focuses on period featured decisions of the appellate courts impacting the workers' compensation system on issues ranging from willful misconduct to statutes of limitations. Topics discussed include the court case Barnes v. Roseburg Forest Products Co., the case Bell v. Gilder Timber Co., and the case Burdette v. Chandler Telecom LLC.

The article discusses a British court case 'The Advocate General for Scotland v Murray Group Holdings Ltd.' concerned with the taxation treatment of so-called employee benefit trusts (EBTS) in Great Britain. Topics discussed include Tribunals, Courts and Enforce judicial knowledge of English lawement Act 2007, the unified tribunal system of the country; and judicial knowledge of English law to courts.

The article offers information on the laws related to employer-sponsored oocyte cryopreservation, which is an frontier in the application of novel reproductive medical technologies to existing social problems, in Australia. Topics discussed include laws concerning assisted reproductive technology (ART) technology; companies act of offering egg freezing as a fringe benefit; and employment contract and governed by the common law.

In litigation against ride-sharing companies Uber and Lyft, former drivers have alleged that they were misclassified as independent contractors and denied employment benefits. The companies have countered that they do not employ drivers but merely license access to a platform that matches those who need rides with nearby, available drivers. At stake are the prospects, not only for Uber and Lyft, but for a nascent, multi-billion dollar, "on-demand" economy. Unfortunately, existing laws fail to provide adequate guidance regarding the distinction between independent contractors and employees, especially when applied to the hybrid working arrangements common in a modern economy. Under the Fair Labor Standards Act and analogous state laws, courts consider several factors to assess the "economic reality" of a worker's alleged employment status; yet, there is no objective basis for prioritizing those factors. This Essay argues that the classification of workers as independent contractors or employees should be shaped by an overarching inquiry: How much flexibility do individuals have in determining the time, place, price, manner, and frequency of the work they perform? Those who select these variables are more independent than those who must accommodate themselves to a business owner's schedule. Our approach is novel and would provide an objective basis for adjudicating classification disputes, especially those that arise in the context of the on-demand economy. By reducing legal uncertainty, this focus on worker flexibility would ensure both that workers receive appropriate protections under existing law and that businesses are able to innovate without fear of unknown liabilities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents decisions of courts in cases involving employee benefits law from October 1, 2014, to September 30, 2015 in the U.S. Topics discussed include survey of Case Law in Tibble v. Edison International, denial of claims for long-term disability benefits in Rochow v. Life Insurance Co. of North America, and claims under U.S. Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) in Varity Corp. v. Howe.

The article examines laws defined by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS) concerning taxation of fringe benefits in the U.S., as of January 2016.

The article focuses on the legality of the employee benefit plan with the church-plan status under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA). It mentions that courts' inconsistent textual interpretations of the church plan exemption and the basic canons of statutory construction. It also mentions that ERISA's plain text and agency interpretations warrant broad construction of the church plan exemption.

An essay is presented in which the author explores the impact of the decision on the U.S. Supreme Court case New York Times v. Sullivan on the religious clauses. Topics discussed include the laws emphasizing on the clauses for free speech and political expression, laws for defining sexual orientation, and the laws for the regulation of employee benefits.