A frontline service worker at a Cinnabon was recently terminated after a video circulated showing her hurling a racist epithet at a Somali couple. The footage spread quickly with millions of views on TikTok. The employer acted swiftly. And, in a development emblematic of the current digital moment, the terminated employee has since raised more than $327,000 in online donations as part of “A Public Awareness Initiative.”
Assembly Bill 2499 (AB 2499), which took effect on January 1, 2025, broadens previous requirements on how California employers treat employees who are victims of violence or who are the family members of victims. The new law broadens previous requirements and introduces several key changes for employers, including:
Last week, a Hennepin County judge sentenced an employer following a first-of-its-kind criminal conviction for wage theft in Minnesota.
Since its enactment in 2019, Minnesota’s Wage Theft Prevention Act has imposed stringent penalties on employers who unlawfully withhold wages from employees. Under the Act, employers may face felony charges if they commit wage theft with intent to defraud their employees in an amount greater than $1,000.
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.
On Wednesday, April 23rd, President Trump signed an Executive Order (EO) titled “Restoring Equality of Opportunity and Meritocracy,” which renounces disparate impact theories of discrimination, and signals a significant shift for the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC) enforcement approach. In the EO, the White House directed all agencies to “deprioritize enforcement of all statutes and regulations to the extent they include disparate-impact liability.” The EO asserted the administration’s stance that disparate impact liability is unlawful, violates our Constitution, and “threatens the commitment to merit and equality of opportunity that forms the foundation of the American Dream.”
On January 15, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a rare unanimous decision in EMD Sales Inc. v. Carrera, addressing the standard of proof employers must meet to establish that an employee is exempt from the minimum wage and overtime requirements under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The Court held employers need only prove employees meet an FLSA exemption by a preponderance of the evidence (more likely true than not), rejecting the Fourth Circuit’s use of the higher “clear-and-convincing-evidence” standard. This ruling carries significant implications for employers in the context of employee classification and defending against unpaid overtime claims.
Beginning January 1, 2025, as a result of the passage of AB 2299, the California Labor Commissioner has been tasked with creating model notices to aid employers in complying with the current mandate of Labor Code section 1102.8, which requires posting notices to employees of their rights and protections under whistleblower laws. The California Department
In our ever-evolving world, fostering cultural sensitivity is paramount for creating inclusive and respectful work environments and minimizing legal risks. Language plays a crucial role in shaping our perceptions, and unfortunately, some words used in everyday conversation may perpetuate stereotypes and contribute to cultural insensitivity. This Native American Heritage Month, employers should consider abandoning the following words and phrases, and encourage their employees to do the same, in an effort to embrace more inclusive work environments, and mitigate the risk of discrimination claims brought by indigenous members of their workforce.
In 2024, Governor Gavin Newsom signed several bills impacting California employers, which go into effect on January 1, 2025. We discuss the most notable new laws affecting employers below.
An Election Primer for Private-Sector Employers
As the 2024 general election draws near, employers can anticipate a rise in political expression from employees both inside and outside of the workplace. Political speech encompasses a broad array of activities, extending far beyond verbal or written communication on political topics. For example, wearing clothing or accessories that endorse or oppose certain issues (N.L.R.B. v. Mead Corp.); wearing wrist bands in support of political causes (Tinker v. Des Moines); displaying bumper stickers, campaign buttons or political posters (Ferguson Police Officers Ass’n v. City of Ferguson); donning insignia such as buttons or decals (Home Depot USA, Inc. and Antonio Morales Jr.); and even “liking” a social media post can be viewed as protected speech (Bland v. Roberts).