On June 28, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, Secretary of Commerce and Relentless, Inc. v. Department of Commerce (Loper Bright), overturning Chevron U.S.A. Inc v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. (Chevron). In this landmark case, Loper Bright overruled the forty-year doctrine known as “Chevron deference,” whereby courts defer to an administrative agency’s reasonable interpretation of ambiguous federal laws, even if the court disagrees with the agency’s interpretation. Instead, Loper Bright held that courts must exercise independent judgment in deciding whether an administrative agency has acted within its statutory authority, and may not automatically defer to an agency’s legal interpretation when a statute is ambiguous.Continue Reading Chevron No More: The Impact on Benefit Plans
Federal Court Blocks FTC Non-Compete Rule Nationwide
Today, the federal district court for the Northern District of Texas, in Ryan LLC v. Federal Trade Commission [FTC] (opinion found here), “set aside” with nationwide effect, the FTC “Non-Compete Rule.” The federal district court held that the FTC exceeded its statutory authority in promulgating the Non-Compete Rule, concluding “the text and the structure of the FTC Act reveal the FTC lacks substantive rulemaking authority with respect to unfair methods of compensation….”Continue Reading Federal Court Blocks FTC Non-Compete Rule Nationwide
Florida Medicaid Providers: New $15 Minimum Wage Requirements
Effective October 1, 2022, certain providers participating in the Florida Medicaid program will be required to pay direct care workers a minimum of $15 per hour. Below we’ve outlined which organizations are subject to this new requirement and other relevant implementation details.
Continue Reading Florida Medicaid Providers: New $15 Minimum Wage Requirements
EVENT: Labor & Employment Law Update — Guidance for Managing Accommodation Issues Under the ADA
Join us for a complimentary seminar where we will review a broad range of topics pertaining to accommodation issues under the ADA and provide guidance for employers managing these issues.
7:30 a.m. – 8:00 a.m. Registration and Breakfast
8:00 a.m. – 10:30 a.m. Program
Our panels will cover a broad range of topics, including:
- How
Navigating the ACA in the Trump Era
Overview
On November 8, 2016, the future of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) became more uncertain. Republicans in Congress have been working to repeal the ACA since it was passed in 2010, and now, with control of both houses of Congress and the White House, they may finally get the chance to do so. President-elect Trump has stated that the Trump Administration will work with Congress to repeal the ACA and replace it with a “patient-centered healthcare system” that includes Health Savings Accounts (HSAs), the return of high-risk pools and the “modernization” of Medicare. Trump announced this week the nomination of Georgia Congressman Tom Price, a physician and long-time critic of the ACA, as Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services. Additionally, Speaker Paul Ryan has set forth his “A Better Way” healthcare reform plan that would repeal and replace the ACA. Ryan’s plan includes substantial reform to Medicaid through per capita allotment financing and block grants; the creation of a “Medicare Exchange” in which private plans would compete with traditional fee-for-service Medicare; and Medicare “premium support” payments that would be paid by Medicare directly to the private plan or the fee-for-service program to subsidize its cost.Continue Reading Navigating the ACA in the Trump Era
Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces Not “Fair” to Contractors, According to Texas Judge
On October 24, 2016, U.S. District Judge Marcia Crone granted a preliminary injunction to halt the implementation of the “Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces” Executive Order 13673 (EO 13673), implementing provisions of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) in the final rule, and Department of Labor (DOL) guidance that impose new reporting requirements on contractors regarding labor law violations.
Continue Reading Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces Not “Fair” to Contractors, According to Texas Judge
Hurricane Damage Control: Piecing Together Time Records
Bass, Berry & Sims attorney Tim Garrett discussed how natural disasters, such as the recent Hurricane Matthew, can impact employers and employees as they strive to maintain compliance with labor and employment laws. The article outlines key compliance areas such as timekeeping records and delivery of paychecks that could be effected. As with any disruption
Bob Horton Content Cited in Leading Guide on Healthcare Valuation
The authors of the BVR/AHLA Guide to Healthcare Industry Finance and Valuation cited content from Bob Horton’s 2013 Member Briefing, “Restrictive Covenants in Physician Employment Relationships.” Bob’s briefing, written for the Labor & Employment and the Business Law & Governance Practice Groups of the American Health Lawyers Association (AHLA), outlines the enforceability of
Workplace Conflicts: How Involved Must An Employer Be?
Bass, Berry & Sims attorney Tim Garrett analyzed an employer’s obligations in responding to workplace conflict among employees. Conduct on social media between colleagues and domestic violence situations that can spill over into the workplace have blurred the lines of what is considered on-duty and off-duty behavior. This new landscape has left many employers wondering
U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Sixth Circuit’s Long-Standing Presumption Treating Healthcare Benefits as Vested for Life
Employers in Michigan, Kentucky, Ohio and Tennessee may now have more freedom to alter, reduce or eliminate healthcare benefits provided to retired union workers. On January 26, 2015, the Supreme Court in M&G Polymers USA, LLC v. Tackett unanimously decided that the Sixth Circuit’s long-standing “Yard-Man” presumption violates traditional principles of contract law. 2015 U.S. LEXIS 759 (2015). Under Yard-Man, courts should presume that healthcare benefits provided to union employees are vested for the life of the retired employee unless the collective-bargaining agreement clearly states to the contrary. See United Auto Workers v. Yard-Man, Inc., 716 F.2d 1476 (6th Cir. 1983). As Justice Clarence Thomas noted, however, such a presumption distorts any attempt to ascertain the actual intent of the parties. As a result, it effectively disregards ordinary contract principles and “plac[es] a thumb on the scale in favor of vested retiree benefits in all collective-bargaining agreements.” M&G Polymers, 2015 U.S. LEXIS, at *18.
Continue Reading U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Sixth Circuit’s Long-Standing Presumption Treating Healthcare Benefits as Vested for Life