The U.S. Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division issued four new opinion letters on May 28, 2026, signed by Wage and Hour Administrator Andrew B. Rogers. These letters offer useful, if non-binding, insight into how the DOL currently interprets several common wage-and-hour issues under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). A summary of each
DOL Issues Four New FLSA Opinion Letters Read More »
Minnesota employers: the Department of Labor and Industry’s new Earned Sick and Safe Time rules are now in effect (as of July 6, 2026). These rules bring needed clarity on accrual years, eligibility determinations, documentation, incentives, and how ESST interacts with other leave policies. Below is a practical, step-by-step compliance manual distilled from the adopted
Minnesota ESST Rules part 2: Step-by-Step Guide to the 2026 MNDOLI Rules Read More »
As employers continue recalibrating return-to-office expectations in the years after the COVID-19 pandemic, many are facing a steady stream of requests for full-time remote work as a disability accommodation under the ADA. Recent federal appellate decisions offer important guidance. Courts continue to treat these requests as highly fact-specific inquiries centered on the essential functions of
Remote Work as an ADA Accommodation: What Recent Court Decisions Mean for Employers Read More »
Minnesota’s Department of Labor and Industry (DLI) has finalized administrative rules for the Earned Sick and Safe Time (ESST) Law, effective July 6, 2026. These clarifications address key pain points for employers—attendance incentives, documentation, accrual calculations, and policy interactions—making compliance more straightforward while protecting employee rights. Designating & Changing the Accrual Year The statute defines
Bob was a solid, long-term employee. But at the company retreat, he stayed late at the bar, had a few too many drinks, and made a highly inappropriate pass at a member of the hotel staff. The hotel had enough and called you, his supervisor, to come get him. You dutifully complied and found Bob
In the first installment on FLSA classifications we suggested that employers perform an internal audit to assess compliance with FLSA and state law exemptions from overtime. In this post, we review a key strategic tool to address the misclassifications. Reclassification from exempt to non-exempt is a key compliance step under the FLSA. When done proactively,
FLSA Reclassification: 5 Steps to Move from Exempt to Non-Exempt Compliance Read More »
On Thursday, May 14, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) issued a technical amendment formally restoring the pre-2024 regulatory text governing overtime exemptions under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), implementing federal court orders that had already vacated the Biden-era salary threshold rule. For employers across the country, this development carries immediate and practical implications.
DOL Restores Pre-2024 FLSA Overtime Exemptions: $684/Week Salary Threshold Now in Effect Read More »
On April 27, 2026, Bloomington, Minnesota repealed its Earned Sick and Safe Time Ordinance. As explained in the corresponding meeting agenda packet, “the primary purpose of Bloomington’s ESST ordinance, to guarantee paid sick and safe time, has been fulfilled by the statewide law.” Bloomington is the second Minnesota city to repeal its paid sick and safe leave ordinance
Bloomington Repeals ESST Ordinance: What Minnesota Employers Need to Know Read More »
Historically, menopause has not been specifically identified as a protected medical condition under state and federal law, even though its related symptoms in many cases are medical conditions covered by existing leave and accommodation laws. That is rapidly changing. In 2025, Rhode Island became the first state to expressly require workplace accommodations for employees experiencing menopause
Menopause at Work: When Accommodation Expectations Become Explicit Law Read More »
Establishing a claim of unlawful discrimination or retaliation in the workplace requires, among other elements, that an employee show they experienced an “adverse employment action.” Since Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, 601 U.S. 346 (2024), where the U.S. Supreme Court held that an employee need not show “significant” harm, but only “some harm,” to establish an
Drafting Lawful Performance Improvement Plans After Muldrow and Walsh Read More »
