Londono v. The City of Elizabeth, 2010 WL 3720299 (App. Div., September 17, 2010) – In this case, the Appellate Division refused to dismiss a clerk’s battery claim against a municipal judge, even though her sexual harassment claim against the judge under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (LAD) was dismissed on summary judgment. Because the judge was neither her employer, nor could he be an aider and abettor to his own conduct, her sexual harassment claim against him under the LAD failed. However, following established New Jersey precedent, the court found that a claim for battery can exist independent of the LAD claim and allowed that claim to proceed.
On June 20, 2016, the Supreme Court of the United States issued a ruling regarding the Fair Labor Standards Act’s (FLSA) overtime exemption for “any salesman, partsman, or mechanic primarily engaged in selling or servicing automobiles” at a covered dealership under section 213(b)(10)(A) of the FLSA. A 1970 U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) regulation limited this overtime exemption to salesmen (who primarily obtained orders or made sales of vehicles) and excluded service advisors (who sold service and maintenance services) from its coverage. After several courts rejected this interpretation, the DOL’s Wage and Hour Division (WHD) issued an opinion letter in 1978 and amended its Field Operations Handbook in 1987 stating that service advisors could be exempt from overtime under section 213(b)(10)(A). However, a 2011 final rule reaffirmed this initial regulation’s position. Because the automobile industry has relied on service advisors being exempt, and because the DOL released the 2011 rule without providing a “reasoned explanation” for its change in position, the Court ruled that the 2011 rule is not entitled to deference.
On Friday, June 30, 2017, Missouri Governor Eric Greitens announced that he would take no action with respect to HB 1194, which had been passed by the Missouri General Assembly and delivered to him in May.
The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) issued two Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) opinion letters on December 31, 2020. One of those letters addresses travel time that occurs when employees schedule personal appointments during the workday and perform portions of their work remotely. The other addresses compensation arrangements for live-in home health care workers whose shifts may extend beyond 24 hours.