Is a Convicted Felon Absolutely Barred from Practicing or Engaging in Any Trade, Occupation, or Profession for Which a License, Permit, or Certificate is Required to be Issued by the state of Louisiana? Not Anymore . . .

On May 16, 2019, President Donald Trump outlined, in broad strokes, his new immigration plan. The proposal delineates two primary goals: securing the U.S. border and protecting American workers. Most notably, the plan includes the introduction of a new “Build America” visa that would replace existing green card preference categories and limit family-based immigration in favor of a merit-based points system.

At an American Bar Association meeting in March 2013, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health Richard Fairfax discussed recent statistics that continue to reflect OSHA’s enforcement efforts. Fairfax indicated that since the inception of OSHA’s Severe Enhancement Violator Program (SVEP) through January 31, 2013, OSHA has…..

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.