Category Archives: Employment policies

Artificial Intelligence, Employment policies, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), Independent Contractors, Non-compete agreements, Wage and Hour Issues

Evolving Landscape of Employment Law: Key Updates for 2025

Leave a comment

If you’re an employ­er or an employ­ee, keep­ing up with employ­ment law changes can feel like chas­ing a mov­ing tar­get. With new court deci­sions, leg­isla­tive updates, and evolv­ing work­place norms, it’s more impor­tant than ever to stay informed. As we set­tle into 2025, here are some of the most sig­nif­i­cant devel­op­ments shap­ing employ­ment law across the country—and par­tic­u­lar­ly in West Virginia.

1. Remote Work and Wage & Hour Compliance

The pan­dem­ic may be in the rearview mir­ror, but remote and hybrid work are here to stay. That shift has raised fresh legal ques­tions, par­tic­u­lar­ly when it comes to wage and hour compliance.

A major trend we’re see­ing is increased scruti­ny from the U.S. Depart­ment of Labor (DOL) regard­ing remote work­ers’ over­time eli­gi­bil­i­ty. The Fair Labor Stan­dards Act (FLSA) requires employ­ers to track hours worked accu­rate­ly, but when employ­ees are log­ging in from home, com­pli­ance gets tricky. Employ­ers must ensure that non-exempt employ­ees are prop­er­ly record­ing breaks, over­time, and any “off-the-clock” work.

West Vir­ginia busi­ness­es with remote employ­ees should take a close look at their time-track­ing poli­cies to avoid poten­tial wage claims. Even an hon­est mistake—like fail­ing to count time spent respond­ing to emails after hours—can lead to cost­ly litigation.

2. Noncompete Agreements Under Fire

Non­com­pete agree­ments have been a hot-but­ton issue in recent years, and 2025 is shap­ing up to be a turn­ing point. The Fed­er­al Trade Com­mis­sion (FTC) issued a rule (April 2024) with a near­ly com­pre­hen­sive nation­wide ban on most non­com­pete claus­es, argu­ing that they sti­fle job mobil­i­ty and wage growth. 

I will dis­cuss below the legal chal­lenges to the FTC rule, but employ­ers should review their exist­ing agree­ments and con­sid­er whether non­com­petes are still enforce­able (in light of applic­a­ble state law and the prospect of the FTC rule sur­viv­ing legal attacks) or if alter­na­tive protections—such as con­fi­den­tial­i­ty and non­so­lic­i­ta­tion clauses—are a bet­ter approach.

Sta­tus of the FTC rule

Con­tin­ue read­ing Evolv­ing Land­scape of Employ­ment Law: Key Updates for 2025 →
Employment policies

Rex Tillerson’s First Speech at the State Department: Lessons for Employers

Leave a comment

Lessons for Employers

The U.S. State Depart­ment has about 70,000 employ­ees. Rex Tiller­son was con­firmed as Pres­i­dent Trump’s pick for Sec­re­tary of State, and yes­ter­day was his first day on the job.

So Tiller­son spoke yes­ter­day to hun­dreds of State Depart­ment employ­ees to intro­duce him­self and talk about their shared mission.

I was impressed by the speech, and I thought the speech could give a lot of guid­ance to man­age­ment about the mes­sage that com­pa­nies and gov­ern­ment agen­cies should com­mu­ni­cate to their employees.

Con­tin­ue read­ing Rex Tillerson’s First Speech at the State Depart­ment: Lessons for Employ­ers →
Attorney's Fees, Back and Front Pay Issues, Constructive discharge, Emotional Distress Damages, Employment policies, Hostile work environment, Prompt remedial action, Race discrimination, Result for Employee, Retaliation claims, WV Human Rights Act, WV Human Rights Commission, WV Supreme Court

The disastrous consequences of the N‑word in the workplace. Just ask Dr. Laura!

1 Comment

Okay, this arti­cle has noth­ing to do with Dr. Lau­ra Sch­lessinger and her “rant” in which she used the N‑word repeat­ed­ly on her radio pro­gram when respond­ing to an African-Amer­i­can caller. But the ensu­ing con­tro­ver­sy (see arti­cles for and against Dr. Lau­ra), and her deci­sion to end her long-run­ning radio pro­gram, high­light the extra­or­di­nary sig­nif­i­cance of the N‑word term in Amer­i­can society.

The West Vir­ginia Supreme Court recent­ly dealt with the N‑word in a case that high­lights the great risks for employ­ers when that word enters the workplace.

In PAR Elec­tri­cal Con­trac­tors, Inc. v. Bev­elle , 225 W. Va. 624, 695 S.E.2d 854, 2010 WL 2244096 (June 3, 2010) (per curi­am), the West Vir­ginia Supreme Court dealt with a claim of a racial­ly based hos­tile work envi­ron­ment under the West Vir­ginia Human Rights Act, and con­clud­ed that the West Vir­ginia Human Rights Com­mis­sion was jus­ti­fied in find­ing for the employ­ee. The deci­sion was unan­i­mous. Click here for the WV Human Rights Com­mis­sion’s deci­sion which was affirmed by the WV Supreme Court.

A Single Day, With the N‑Word Again and Again

PAR Elec­tri­cal was build­ing “giant tow­ers” for a high volt­age elec­tri­cal trans­mis­sion line. Richard Wayne Bev­elle was hired by PAR Elec­tri­cal on March 22, 2005, and, after work­ing as a “ground­man” assem­bling the tow­er bases, was assigned to load heli­copters with parts to con­struct the tow­ers (this heli­copter job was described as a “gravy job” by the Human Rights Com­mis­sion). Mr. Bev­elle is African-American.

Con­tin­ue read­ing The dis­as­trous con­se­quences of the N‑word in the work­place. Just ask Dr. Lau­ra! →
Employment policies, Hostile work environment, National origin discrimination, Prompt remedial action, Religious discrimination, Result for Employer, WV Human Rights Act, WV Supreme Court

WV Supreme Court rules that employer’s policy and prompt action protected it against liability; Colgan Air v. WV HRC; 10/25/07

4 Comments

West Virginia Capitol Building at Night Octo­ber 25, 2007: In Col­gan Air, Inc. v. West Vir­ginia Human Rights Com­mis­sion, 221 W. Va. 588, 656 S.E.2d 33 (1977) the West Vir­ginia Supreme Court addressed claims of harass­ment (based on reli­gion and nation­al ori­gin) and retal­i­a­tion under the WV Human Rights Act, W. Va. Code § 5–11‑1 et seq.

The plain­tiff was a pilot, Rao Zahid Khan, who alleged that his co-work­ers sub­ject­ed him to fre­quent deroga­to­ry and insult­ing com­ments about his nation­al ori­gin and reli­gion (he was Ara­bic). The West Vir­ginia Supreme Court ruled that Col­gan Air (a) was not liable for harass­ment because it had poli­cies and pro­ce­dures pro­hibit­ing harass­ment and took swift and deci­sive action after learn­ing about the harass­ment, and (b) was not liable for retal­i­a­tion because Col­gan Air ter­mi­nat­ed the employ­ee (Mr. Khan) for a legit­i­mate and non-dis­crim­i­na­to­ry reason–he failed to pass a manda­to­ry FAA pro­fi­cien­cy test for pilots.

Con­tin­ue read­ing WV Supreme Court rules that employer’s pol­i­cy and prompt action pro­tect­ed it against lia­bil­i­ty; Col­gan Air v. WV HRC; 10/25/07 →