#WorkforceWednesday: Nationwide FLSA Lawsuits Just Got Harder—Here’s Why
Employment Law This Week Podcast
Release Date: 08/06/2025
Employment Law This Week Podcast
This week, we dig into the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit’s new Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) collective action notice standard, the U.S. Department of Labor’s (DOL’s) relaunched Payroll Audit Independent Determination (PAID) program, and the DOL’s scaled-back approach to wage and hour investigation penalties. Seventh Circuit’s New Standard for FLSA Notice The Seventh Circuit has introduced the Richards framework, a middle-ground standard for FLSA collective actions. This decision deepens the circuit split over notices to potential plaintiffs and could lead to...
info_outlineEmployment Law This Week Podcast
New guidance from Attorney General Bondi urges federal funding recipients to to ensure compliance with anti-discrimination laws. This memo highlights actions deemed “unlawful DEI,” including race-based scholarships, preferential hiring, and misapplied “neutral” criteria. What This Means for Employers: Federal consequences: Noncompliance risks include or False Claims Act liability. Beyond federal funding: Private employers should also review DEI policies for legal risks. Focused best practices: Ensure inclusive environments, prioritize skills and qualifications, and eliminate...
info_outlineEmployment Law This Week Podcast
In Harrington v. Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, Inc., the Ninth Circuit ruled that, in FLSA collective actions, federal courts must evaluate personal jurisdiction before allowing notices to out-of-state employees in nationwide claims—a move that strengthens employers’ ability to challenge these cases. Key Takeaways for Employers Jurisdiction matters: Courts must confirm jurisdiction before notifying out-of-state employees. Limited forum shopping: Plaintiffs face limits to filing in unrelated jurisdictions. Stronger grounds for employers: Employers can challenge out-of-state...
info_outlineEmployment Law This Week Podcast
This week, we look at the potential restoration of a quorum at the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB” or “Board”), the U.S. Department of Labor’s (DOL’s) deregulatory initiatives, and lessons from a high-profile workplace incident at a Coldplay concert. NLRB May Regain Quorum Lacking a quorum, the NLRB is currently unable to issue decisions affecting workplace policies and disputes. On July 17, 2025, to fill vacant seats on the Board. Senate confirmation of the nominees is required to restore the Board’s authority and ensure continued guidance for employers. DOL Begins...
info_outlineEmployment Law This Week Podcast
This week, we’re examining the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC’s) stance on a federal non-compete ban, the expansive changes introduced by Florida’s Contracts Honoring Opportunity, Investment, Confidentiality, and Economic Growth (CHOICE) Act, and a pivotal ruling by the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) on pension withdrawal liabilities. FTC Delays Decision on Non-Compete Rule The FTC requested an additional 60 days to decide if it will continue defending the non-compete ban, suggesting the rule may soon be withdrawn. Florida CHOICE...
info_outlineEmployment Law This Week Podcast
The OBBBA introduces major shifts for employers, transforming employee benefits, executive compensation, and workforce compliance. Are you prepared to adapt? Essential Impacts for Employers Dependent care and education benefits—higher flexible spending account limits and tax-favored student loan repayment programs Health savings accounts—expanded eligibility and coverage options for employees Executive compensation rules—new tax implications for public companies and nonprofits Epstein Becker Green attorneys and break down these updates in this episode of Employment Law This Week®....
info_outlineEmployment Law This Week Podcast
Non-compete legislation is evolving rapidly at the state level, with new laws taking effect soon in Arkansas, Kansas, Virginia, and Wyoming. Looking ahead, pending bills in over a dozen states could reshape how employers approach restrictive covenants. In this episode, Epstein Becker Green attorneys , , , and discuss the new and proposed state non-compete laws and their implications for employers, as well as alternative tools that can be used to address these restrictions. From expanded protections for low-wage workers in Virginia to Kansas’s focus on non-solicit provisions, this episode...
info_outlineEmployment Law This Week Podcast
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is ramping up worksite inspections and I-9 audits, presenting new challenges for employers nationwide. With no warning before an ICE visit, preparation is critical to minimizing risks and staying compliant. This week’s key topics include: · maintaining current I-9 forms for employees, · developing a written playbook for ICE raids, and · establishing post-raid protocols to protect and stabilize...
info_outlineEmployment Law This Week Podcast
On May 30, 2025, the DOL moved to eliminate the OFCCP, shifting key enforcement duties to other agencies. At the same time, the DOL has launched a new opinion letter program, expanding access beyond the Wage and Hour Division. Employers must navigate these changes while maintaining compliance with federal, state, and local anti-discrimination laws. Epstein Becker Green attorneys and provide their insights into these shifts and their likely future impact on employers. Visit our site for this week's Other Highlights and links: Subscribe to #WorkforceWednesday: Visit This...
info_outlineEmployment Law This Week Podcast
This week, we cover the striking down of abortion protections for workers and LGBTQ harassment guidance, as well as the beginning of a brief EEO-1 reporting season (concluding on June 24). Abortion Protections for Workers Struck Down A Louisiana federal judge vacated portions of a rule implementing the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act that defined abortion as a medical condition and required accommodations. Federal Court Vacates LGBTQ Harassment Guidance The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas has moved to strike portions of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s...
info_outlineIn Harrington v. Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, Inc., the Ninth Circuit ruled that, in FLSA collective actions, federal courts must evaluate personal jurisdiction before allowing notices to out-of-state employees in nationwide claims—a move that strengthens employers’ ability to challenge these cases.
Key Takeaways for Employers
- Jurisdiction matters: Courts must confirm jurisdiction before notifying out-of-state employees.
- Limited forum shopping: Plaintiffs face limits to filing in unrelated jurisdictions.
- Stronger grounds for employers: Employers can challenge out-of-state claims with no forum ties.
- Arbitration implications: Courts may notify employees under arbitration agreements.
In this episode of Employment Law This Week®, Epstein Becker Green attorney Courtney McFate describes the Harrington ruling and shares insights to help employers adapt and minimize costly lawsuits.
Visit our site for this week’s Other Highlights and links: https://www.ebglaw.com/eltw399
Subscribe to #WorkforceWednesday: https://www.ebglaw.com/eltw-subscribe
Visit http://www.EmploymentLawThisWeek.com
Download our Wage & Hour Guide for Employers app: https://www.ebglaw.com/wage-hour-guide-for-employers-app.
This podcast is presented by Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. All rights are reserved. This audio recording includes information about legal issues and legal developments. Such materials are for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal developments. These informational materials are not intended, and should not be taken, as legal advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances, and these materials are not a substitute for the advice of competent counsel. The content reflects the personal views and opinions of the participants. No attorney-client relationship has been created by this audio recording. This audio recording may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules. The determination of the need for legal services and the choice of a lawyer are extremely important decisions and should not be based solely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. No representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.