Photo of Chengzhuo He

Chengzhuo He

Chengzhuo assists businesses with navigating the ever-evolving labor and employment landscape. He provides research, analysis, and counsel to help clients stay in compliance. Chengzhuo also has experience litigating employment disputes in state and federal courts, as well as before administrative agencies, including discovery, drafting position statements, mediation statements and motions.

Contact:Read more about Chengzhuo He
Pen on the contract papers

Employers often invest significant time and money in recruiting and paying sign-on bonuses for new hires. They also spend on relocating, training, funding necessary licenses and certifications for new or current employees, and paying retention bonuses for current employees. To protect these investments, employers have increasingly turned to contractual provisions that require workers who receive these incentives to repay specified amounts if they leave before completing a defined period of service.

Two business professionals shaking hands in an office setting

As artificial intelligence (AI) continues to reshape business operations, many employers are reassessing workforce needs and organizational structure. For many organizations, workforce reductions or redeployments may be unavoidable as roles evolve, processes are automated, and business models change. While some organizations may ultimately pursue involuntary reductions in force (RIFs), others are exploring whether voluntary separation programs (VSPs) can achieve workforce‑reduction goals while mitigating legal, operational, reputational, and employee‑relations risks.

Kansas state flag. Vector illustration.

On April 8, 2025, Kansas Governor Laura Kelly signed Senate Bill 241 (SB 241) into law, amending the Kansas Restraint of Trade Act (K.S.A. 50-163). Taking effect on July 1, 2025, this new employer-friendly legislation clarifies the enforceability of customer and employee non-solicitation covenants in Kansas. Under the new law, customer and employee non-solicitation agreements that meet specific requirements are presumed valid and enforceable. This new law also mandates courts to modify overbroad restrictive covenants. SB 241 expressly does not apply to non-competition covenants—meaning it does not affect the enforceability of traditional non-competes, which continue to be governed by existing law.

Some ampoules with vaccine and syringe injection.

The COVID-19 pandemic brought workplace vaccination policies to the forefront, raising complex questions about religious accommodations. Over four years after the initial rollout of the COVID-19 vaccine, these policies remain in the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC) crosshairs. The EEOC’s settlement with Infinity Rehab, announced on May 20, 2025, demonstrates that decisions made during the pandemic continue to create challenges for employers—and provides important insight into the EEOC’s current enforcement priorities.

The Division of Advice (the “Division”) of the National Labor Relations Board (the “NLRB”) recently released an advice memorandum examining the lawfulness of various key provisions – including non-solicitation, non-disclosure, and return of property provisions – contained in an employer’s standard employment agreement. The Division’s approach in this particular case serves as a helpful guide for how the agency will likely assess other similar agreements in the future. 

Democrats and Republicans within the House Committee on Education and the Workforce have recently expressed bipartisan interest in raising or eliminating the statutory caps on damages for claims brought under Title VII and the ADA. While the plan is still in its very early stages, any revisions to statutory damages caps would have significant implications for employers.