Search for: "State of Vermont" Results 2141 - 2160 of 7,975
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 Mar 2018, 9:32 am by Eugene Volokh
When the probation company turned her file back over to the state, the state tacked on even more administrative fees and surcharges. [read post]
5 Mar 2018, 7:35 am by Tammy Binford, Contributing Editor
Leigh Cole, an editor of Vermont Employment Law Letter and attorney with Dinse, Knapp & McAndrew, P.C., in Burlington, Vermont, says employers should not take any action around DACA. [read post]
5 Mar 2018, 7:35 am by Tammy Binford, Contributing Editor
Leigh Cole, an editor of Vermont Employment Law Letter and attorney with Dinse, Knapp & McAndrew, P.C., in Burlington, Vermont, says employers should not take any action around DACA. [read post]
5 Mar 2018, 2:00 am by Thaddeus Mason Pope, JD, PhD
They include:American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine American Pharmacists Association Oncology Nursing Association California Medical Association California Hospice and Palliative Care Association Colorado Medical Society Maine Medical Association Maryland State Medical Society Massachusetts Medical Society Medical Society of the District of Columbia Minnesota Medical Association Missouri Hospice & Palliative Care Association Nevada State Medical Association Oregon… [read post]
2 Mar 2018, 3:51 pm by Steven Boutwell
  For employers, the past two weeks have included several notable decisions: Dodd-Frank Does Not Protect In-House Whistleblowers Last Wednesday, on February 21, 2018, the United States Supreme Court unanimously held that the anti-retaliation provision of the 2010 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank”) does not apply to employees who report alleged violations internally. [read post]
1 Mar 2018, 11:19 am by NCC Staff
Benjamin Battles is the solicitor general of Vermont, which filed an amicus brief with 34 other states and the commonwealth of Puerto Rico in support of the federal government in United States v. [read post]
1 Mar 2018, 10:38 am by Nassiri Law
The 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals covers Connecticut, New York and Vermont, while the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals includes areas of Indiana, Illinois, and Wisconsin.Californians are fortunate that the state’s Fair Employment and Housing Act already includes “sexual orientation” among protected employee traits for employers of five or more. [read post]
” Employers operating within the Second Circuit – comprising New York, Connecticut, and Vermont – already should have in place policies prohibiting sexual orientation discrimination because those state laws expressly prohibit such conduct. [read post]
27 Feb 2018, 7:30 am by Miriam Edelstein
It is worth noting that employers in these states were already prohibited from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation under express provisions of each state’s laws. [read post]
26 Feb 2018, 8:20 am by Tammy Binford, Contributing Editor
” The states of New York, Alaska, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Mexico, New Jersey, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia and Washington, and the District of Columbia: The states and Washington, D.C., argue that agency fees “are important to maintaining the labor-management model that many states rely on to ensure the effective and efficient provision of… [read post]
26 Feb 2018, 8:20 am by Tammy Binford, Contributing Editor
” The states of New York, Alaska, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Mexico, New Jersey, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia and Washington, and the District of Columbia: The states and Washington, D.C., argue that agency fees “are important to maintaining the labor-management model that many states rely on to ensure the effective and efficient provision of… [read post]
Moreover, a policy that doesn’t explicitly restrict Section 7 activities is still unlawful if: Employees would reasonably construe it to prohibit them from exercising Section 7 rights; It was promulgated in response to union activity; or It has been applied to restrict employees’ exercise of their Section 7 rights. 2nd Circuit Affirms NLRB’s Decision in Whole Foods The issue before the NLRB and the 2nd Circuit—which covers Connecticut, New York, and… [read post]
Moreover, a policy that doesn’t explicitly restrict Section 7 activities is still unlawful if: Employees would reasonably construe it to prohibit them from exercising Section 7 rights; It was promulgated in response to union activity; or It has been applied to restrict employees’ exercise of their Section 7 rights. 2nd Circuit Affirms NLRB’s Decision in Whole Foods The issue before the NLRB and the 2nd Circuit—which covers Connecticut, New York, and… [read post]