Search for: "South Dakota Employment Law Letter" Results 21 - 40 of 143
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
5 Nov 2020, 11:31 am by Tammy Binford, Contributing Editor
Roesler, an attorney with the Goosman Law Firm in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, says the amendment doesn’t prevent employers from having drug and alcohol policies. [read post]
11 Sep 2013, 4:04 am by Matthew L.M. Fletcher
  Dakota Plains Legal Services is an Equal Opportunity Employer. [read post]
4 Nov 2010, 8:31 am by HR Hero Alerts
Jane Pfeifle is editor of South Dakota Employment Law Letter and an attorney in the Rapid City office of Lynn, Jackson, Shultz & Lebrun, P.C. [read post]
3 Feb 2011, 6:52 pm by Seth Borden
The Acting General Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board has responded to the joint letter by the Attorneys General of Arizona, South Carolina, South Dakota and Utah proclaiming their intent to defend their state constitutions against any NLRB litigation to invalidate recent secret ballot amendments. [read post]
29 Apr 2008, 1:06 pm
The South Dakota Employment Law Letter takes a look at a case that asks whether needing to eat at your desk is a disability. [read post]
14 Jan 2011, 10:56 am
This past election cycle four states, Arizona, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Utah, had ballot measures that would ban card check legislation--that is, sought to preempt the controversial Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA). [read post]
8 Oct 2010, 11:36 am by Tana Fye
My initial answer was no, South Dakota law does not provide for expungement of convictions. [read post]
17 Jan 2018, 9:41 am by Tammy Binford
Frank, an editor of South Dakota Employment Law Letter and attorney with Lynn, Jackson, Shultz & Lebrun, P.C., in Rapid City, South Dakota, wrote in the January 2017 issue of the newsletter. [read post]
29 Jan 2015, 2:58 pm by aet1
SDSU is located in Brookings, South Dakota, a community of approximately 18,800 near the east central border of South Dakota on Interstate 29. [read post]
10 Nov 2016, 6:38 am by Kate Tornone
South Dakota’s long-standing status as a right-to-work state is preserved, at least for now,” said Jennifer Frank, also an associate with Lynn, Jackson, Schultz & Lebrun, P.C., and editor of South Dakota Employment Law Letter. [read post]
10 May 2018, 8:39 am by Tammy Binford, Contributing Editor
Frank, an editor of South Dakota Employment Law Letter and attorney with Lynn, Jackson, Shultz & Lebrun, P.C., in Rapid City, South Dakota. [read post]
10 May 2018, 8:39 am by Tammy Binford, Contributing Editor
Frank, an editor of South Dakota Employment Law Letter and attorney with Lynn, Jackson, Shultz & Lebrun, P.C., in Rapid City, South Dakota. [read post]
18 May 2016, 11:00 am by Mike Habib, EA
Responsible parties within the common law employer (client of PSP/PEO). [read post]
27 Jan 2011, 1:32 pm by Seth Borden
” The Senator's release also makes express reference to the recent letter sent by the Acting General Counsel of the NLRB to four states – South Carolina, Arizona, South Dakota and Utah -- regarding their state constitutional amendments making secret ballot elections mandatory: The threatening letter was written by acting NLRB general counsel, Lafe Solomon, who has not been confirmed by the Senate. [read post]
23 Nov 2020, 4:00 am by Howard Friedman
Vasileía tou Theoú, (South Dakota Law Review, Vol. 65, No. 2, 2020).Brian Owsley, Is The Supreme Court Irrational: Trump v. [read post]
29 Jun 2018, 11:00 am by Neoshia Roemer
 The Sissetonoffice serves the Lake Traverse, Flandreau and Yankton Indian Reservations in South Dakota and Grant, Roberts and Charles Mix counties in South Dakota, as well as Native Americans in the eastern half of South Dakota. [read post]
14 Feb 2011, 8:43 am by Hunton & Williams LLP
”  The Senators also point out that under Becker’s leadership, the Board has threatened four states (Arizona, South Carolina, South Dakota and Utah) with lawsuits over constitutional provisions protecting secret ballot union elections that were adopted by the voters of those states, but has ignored provisions in other states that conflict with federal law but benefit unions over employers. [read post]