In State v. Saavedra, 2013 WL 6763248 (App. Div. Dec. 24, 2013), a public sector employee learned that he could be indicted for criminal theft for taking his employer’s highly confidential, original documents, even if his actions would have been protected in a civil suit under Quinlan v. Curtiss-Wright Corp., No. 204 N.J. 239 (2010).
Earlier this summer, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) issued proposed regulations under Sections 409A and 457 of the Internal Revenue Code (the Proposed Regulations) that modify the final regulations issued on April 17, 2007 (the Final Regulations). The Proposed Regulations include new and clarifying provisions that will affect how employers design and operate their nonqualified deferred compensation plans. Primarily, these changes clarify rules relating to (1) income inclusion, (2) exemptions from Section 409A, and (3) opportunities for acceleration and deferral of payments.
When MSHA announced its enforcement policy for how it would define “flagrant violation,” it seemed apparent that this would eventually be challenged in the courts. Several cases are now underway challenging that policy. Most recently, Judge Jerold Feldman of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission has concluded that MSHA’s policy interpreting what constitutes a “flagrant violation” is invalid.
The Second Circuit Court of Appeals recently affirmed the dismissal of a lawsuit brought by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) alleging that non-supervisory attorneys at the Port Authority were paid less than their male counterparts. In doing so, the court held that the EEOC had not sufficiently alleged that the groups performed equal work because the agency failed to allege any facts concerning the attorneys’ actual job duties.