<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Labor Law Journal &#187; Federal Employment Law</title>
	<link>http://www.laborattorney.info/journal/</link>
	<description>Labor Law Journal &#187; Federal Employment Law</description>
	<generator>Gregarius 0.6.1</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<item>
		<title>Federal Employment Law: The Lucky 13.</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EmploymentLawArticles/~3/zrSsJvGacN8/newscount.php</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Sep 2010 01:00:00 -0400</pubDate>
		<guid>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EmploymentLawArticles/~3/zrSsJvGacN8/newscount.php</guid>
	    				<content:encoded><![CDATA[	13 Strategies To Improve Safety, Reduce Exposure, And Improve Profits

The new administration's focus at OSHA, and other government agencies, focuses less on compliance and increasingly more on enforcement. That means more inspections, more audits, and more fines. Here are some ways you can help your company stay out of trouble.
<p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/BZr0PxsQlzTu01zNhYsqpOueKzQ/0/da"><img alt="" src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/BZr0PxsQlzTu01zNhYsqpOueKzQ/0/di" /></img></a><br />
<a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/BZr0PxsQlzTu01zNhYsqpOueKzQ/1/da"><img alt="" src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/BZr0PxsQlzTu01zNhYsqpOueKzQ/1/di" /></img></a></p><img alt="" src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EmploymentLawArticles/~4/zrSsJvGacN8" /> ]]></content:encoded>
</item>
<item>
		<title>Federal Employment Law: Part 2: Are Your Employees Really Important Business Partners? </title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EmploymentLawArticles/~3/ikg2csARd0c/newscount.php</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Sep 2010 01:00:00 -0400</pubDate>
		<guid>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EmploymentLawArticles/~3/ikg2csARd0c/newscount.php</guid>
	    				<content:encoded><![CDATA[	In our last article we took a hard look at the easy-to-say concept that companies "value their employees" or that employees "are our most important asset." Easy to say, yes. But the reality is a bit more difficult  and time consuming. In Part 2 we'll look at this idea in more detail.
<p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/Ecroxx51y-Vv242dj2O9kcUy4iw/0/da"><img alt="" src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/Ecroxx51y-Vv242dj2O9kcUy4iw/0/di" /></img></a><br />
<a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/Ecroxx51y-Vv242dj2O9kcUy4iw/1/da"><img alt="" src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/Ecroxx51y-Vv242dj2O9kcUy4iw/1/di" /></img></a></p><img alt="" src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EmploymentLawArticles/~4/ikg2csARd0c" /> ]]></content:encoded>
</item>
<item>
		<title>Federal Employment Law: H-1B Labor Condition Application Violations Could Cost Your Company Millions</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EmploymentLawArticles/~3/fKEovv0tUkU/newscount.php</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Sep 2010 01:00:00 -0400</pubDate>
		<guid>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EmploymentLawArticles/~3/fKEovv0tUkU/newscount.php</guid>
	    				<content:encoded><![CDATA[	Nothing weighs down an employer more than an investigation by the Wage and Hour Division of the U.S. Department of Labor. Just ask the following information technology companies who failed to properly pay their H-1B workers and ended up paying a lot more in back pay and penalties:
<p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/boCHNVTFnakTSfLCX6RAFd_Qy_U/0/da"><img alt="" src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/boCHNVTFnakTSfLCX6RAFd_Qy_U/0/di" /></img></a><br />
<a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/boCHNVTFnakTSfLCX6RAFd_Qy_U/1/da"><img alt="" src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/boCHNVTFnakTSfLCX6RAFd_Qy_U/1/di" /></img></a></p><img alt="" src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EmploymentLawArticles/~4/fKEovv0tUkU" /> ]]></content:encoded>
</item>
<item>
		<title>Federal Employment Law: FMLA FAQ - Is a cold or the flu a serious health condition?</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EmploymentLawArticles/~3/DULOUNXo4zc/newscount.php</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Sep 2010 01:00:00 -0400</pubDate>
		<guid>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EmploymentLawArticles/~3/DULOUNXo4zc/newscount.php</guid>
	    				<content:encoded><![CDATA[	Q: Can an employee take FMLA leave due to a cold or the flu?
<p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/fIzDjy0aY2M2FqyKe4Ax-QfVDdY/0/da"><img alt="" src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/fIzDjy0aY2M2FqyKe4Ax-QfVDdY/0/di" /></img></a><br />
<a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/fIzDjy0aY2M2FqyKe4Ax-QfVDdY/1/da"><img alt="" src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/fIzDjy0aY2M2FqyKe4Ax-QfVDdY/1/di" /></img></a></p><img alt="" src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EmploymentLawArticles/~4/DULOUNXo4zc" /> ]]></content:encoded>
</item>
<item>
		<title>Federal Employment Law: Health Care Reform -- New Claims and Appeals Requirements.</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EmploymentLawArticles/~3/Ua0WvOvZ8G0/newscount.php</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Sep 2010 01:00:00 -0400</pubDate>
		<guid>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EmploymentLawArticles/~3/Ua0WvOvZ8G0/newscount.php</guid>
	    				<content:encoded><![CDATA[	As mentioned in a previous alert, group health plans will be subject to new claims and appeals requirements under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), signed into law on March 23, 2010, as modified by the Health Care and Education Affordability Act of 2010 (Reconciliation Bill and combined, Health Care Act). In July and August, the Departments of Treasury, Labor, and Health and Human Services issued interim final regulations and other guidance regarding these new requirements.
<p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/UnV3aPtUdaik9mePvIKG1IWjMbI/0/da"><img alt="" src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/UnV3aPtUdaik9mePvIKG1IWjMbI/0/di" /></img></a><br />
<a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/UnV3aPtUdaik9mePvIKG1IWjMbI/1/da"><img alt="" src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/UnV3aPtUdaik9mePvIKG1IWjMbI/1/di" /></img></a></p><img alt="" src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EmploymentLawArticles/~4/Ua0WvOvZ8G0" /> ]]></content:encoded>
</item>
<item>
		<title>Federal Employment Law: Diversity...Moving Forward (pdf).</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EmploymentLawArticles/~3/rXbuV4OxoZQ/newscount.php</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Sep 2010 01:00:00 -0400</pubDate>
		<guid>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EmploymentLawArticles/~3/rXbuV4OxoZQ/newscount.php</guid>
	    				<content:encoded><![CDATA[	As we continue at Ford &amp; Harrison to be on the cutting edge of our practice area, we are also setting the pace for diversity and inclusion.
<p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/dlkFNCaw7N6SGN7aCcOeXDpxbtA/0/da"><img alt="" src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/dlkFNCaw7N6SGN7aCcOeXDpxbtA/0/di" /></img></a><br />
<a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/dlkFNCaw7N6SGN7aCcOeXDpxbtA/1/da"><img alt="" src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/dlkFNCaw7N6SGN7aCcOeXDpxbtA/1/di" /></img></a></p><img alt="" src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EmploymentLawArticles/~4/rXbuV4OxoZQ" /> ]]></content:encoded>
</item>
<item>
		<title>Federal Employment Law: Social Networking in the Retail World.</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EmploymentLawArticles/~3/J_4nSgAqYnM/newscount.php</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Sep 2010 01:00:00 -0400</pubDate>
		<guid>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EmploymentLawArticles/~3/J_4nSgAqYnM/newscount.php</guid>
	    				<content:encoded><![CDATA[	Employer interest in social networking and blogging first came to the headlines when a flight attendant was fired purportedly for posting information about her job on a blog. Since that time, social media has exploded with the rise of Facebook and the advent of YouTube. While the Oxford English Dictionary has not yet recognized "tweet" as a verb meaning to post 140-character messages on Twitter, it must be coming.
<p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/qa2J9CjoWFKkWZsWdXnTPgZcOek/0/da"><img alt="" src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/qa2J9CjoWFKkWZsWdXnTPgZcOek/0/di" /></img></a><br />
<a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/qa2J9CjoWFKkWZsWdXnTPgZcOek/1/da"><img alt="" src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/qa2J9CjoWFKkWZsWdXnTPgZcOek/1/di" /></img></a></p><img alt="" src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EmploymentLawArticles/~4/J_4nSgAqYnM" /> ]]></content:encoded>
</item>
<item>
		<title>Federal Employment Law: 'Upsetting the Natural Order': Managing Employees Old Enough to Be Your Parents.</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EmploymentLawArticles/~3/NXBPpXgvQ2A/newscount.php</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Sep 2010 01:00:00 -0400</pubDate>
		<guid>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EmploymentLawArticles/~3/NXBPpXgvQ2A/newscount.php</guid>
	    				<content:encoded><![CDATA[	If one looks at the research on older workers -- those who are at or close to retirement age -- one finds what Peter Cappelli, director of Wharton's Center for Human Resources, calls "an incredible amount of discrimination, bigger even than discrimination against race or gender." Older people, he says, often find it difficult to get a job, partly because relatively young supervisors are reluctant to hire and then manage employees who are decades older, even though these employees are the type of worker many employers say they want.
<p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/BFuA8-KmEYgfAKsjtYeTigQGt1o/0/da"><img alt="" src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/BFuA8-KmEYgfAKsjtYeTigQGt1o/0/di" /></img></a><br />
<a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/BFuA8-KmEYgfAKsjtYeTigQGt1o/1/da"><img alt="" src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/BFuA8-KmEYgfAKsjtYeTigQGt1o/1/di" /></img></a></p><img alt="" src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EmploymentLawArticles/~4/NXBPpXgvQ2A" /> ]]></content:encoded>
</item>
<item>
		<title>Federal Employment Law: Executive Labor Summary (July/August 2010).</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EmploymentLawArticles/~3/Ai3gTRDwuYo/newscount.php</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Sep 2010 01:00:00 -0400</pubDate>
		<guid>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EmploymentLawArticles/~3/Ai3gTRDwuYo/newscount.php</guid>
	    				<content:encoded><![CDATA[	Dont mess with our cans! Question Beckers ethics? No way! Women and children first! 
EFCA? Trust us...we have a plan...just as soon as we figure out what it is. Laborers International Union bails on Change-to-Win, back to AFL-CIO. Two-member cases keep NLRB busier than one-armed paper hanger. Quality, not quantity? Majority of Americans support unions -- just barely. 
UNITE HERE and SEIU settle "divorce".
<p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/LDCqXHGuqN0MnJ34HuBgddGE2y8/0/da"><img alt="" src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/LDCqXHGuqN0MnJ34HuBgddGE2y8/0/di" /></img></a><br />
<a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/LDCqXHGuqN0MnJ34HuBgddGE2y8/1/da"><img alt="" src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/LDCqXHGuqN0MnJ34HuBgddGE2y8/1/di" /></img></a></p><img alt="" src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EmploymentLawArticles/~4/Ai3gTRDwuYo" /> ]]></content:encoded>
</item>
<item>
		<title>Federal Employment Law: Latest DOL Opinion On Donning and Doffing, Not So Fast - 6th Circuit Says.</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EmploymentLawArticles/~3/od9N4D9tLa0/newscount.php</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Sep 2010 01:00:00 -0400</pubDate>
		<guid>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/EmploymentLawArticles/~3/od9N4D9tLa0/newscount.php</guid>
	    				<content:encoded><![CDATA[	Although it may no longer be true, donning and doffing cases at one time were clearly the big ticket FLSA collective action. And for those still fighting those fights who have been concerned about the thumb that the DOL put on the scale with their June 16 Administrator's Interpretation (No. 2010-2), which reversed course from two earlier opinion letters issued this decade (yes, Obama administration vs. Bush administration), you now have some very favorable authority from yeseterday's decision by the 6th Circuit in Franklin v. Kellogg Co. (6th Cir. 8/31/10) [pdf].
<p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/-KBhRFjeqhfT_27HxUpfQs9aHkI/0/da"><img alt="" src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/-KBhRFjeqhfT_27HxUpfQs9aHkI/0/di" /></img></a><br />
<a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/-KBhRFjeqhfT_27HxUpfQs9aHkI/1/da"><img alt="" src="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/-KBhRFjeqhfT_27HxUpfQs9aHkI/1/di" /></img></a></p><img alt="" src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/EmploymentLawArticles/~4/od9N4D9tLa0" /> ]]></content:encoded>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
