Search for: "Rose v. Department of Labor "
Results 41 - 60
of 110
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Jan 2018, 7:47 am
Department of Labor (“DOL”) continued to manifest an aggressive “push-the-envelope” agenda by agencies, with regulatory oversight of workplace issues continuing as a high priority. [read post]
7 Dec 2017, 7:03 am
In Dutcher v. [read post]
15 Oct 2017, 3:30 am
A rose by any other name… In Secretary United States Depart v. [read post]
25 Nov 2016, 7:01 am
Department of Labor. [read post]
2 Nov 2016, 7:39 am
Department of Labor website says about Mr. [read post]
23 Jun 2016, 9:10 am
Steele v. [read post]
20 Apr 2016, 10:35 am
Coke to allow the Department to deprive all third-party home care employers (who employ more than 90% of all home care employees) of their statutory right to avail themselves of exemptions to overtime under the Fair Labor Standards Act; (2) whether the D.C. [read post]
8 Apr 2016, 10:11 am
Only time shall tell if four Justices have true love’s passion for the question whether the Department of Labor improperly denied third-party home care companies the ability to avail themselves of statutory home-care overtime exemptions. [read post]
4 Jan 2016, 4:08 pm
New Department of Justice Policy Means Corporate Officials Could be Targeted When the U.S. [read post]
28 Dec 2015, 5:29 pm
Allred (10th Cir., December 14, 2015) (reversing district court denial of relief---wages for H-2A sheepherders---under the Fair Labor Standards Act)Workers Compensation/Occupational Safety and Disease*Rose v. [read post]
9 Aug 2015, 9:05 pm
Quick answer: no” [David Henderson; WSJ/@scottlincicome on seasonal pool-supply company] Hillary Clinton and the Market Basket Stores myth [James Taranto] Labor Department proposes tightening regulation of retirement financial advisers [Kenneth Bentsen, The Hill] Proposed: “well-orchestrated” state ballot initiatives aimed at overturning employment at will [Rand Wilson, Workplace Fairness] My view: “Everybody wins with at-will employment” [Ethan… [read post]
10 Jul 2015, 4:20 am
Judge Pauley’s conclusion that the plaintiffs were “employees” – and, thus, entitled to be paid – was based on his analysis of the Department of Labor’s Fact Sheet #71. [read post]
30 Jun 2015, 10:53 am
President Obama made clear last week he views the King ruling as giving the Internal Revenue Service, Department of Labor and Department of Health & Human Services the all clear for full implementation and enforcement of ACA and other federal health plan rules. [read post]
13 Apr 2015, 12:56 pm
ROSE CORE v. [read post]
7 Apr 2015, 2:11 pm
Supreme Court’s recent decision in Perez v. [read post]
25 Feb 2015, 6:49 am
Here was a man who rose to the top of a prestigious G.R. law firm, probably relatively conservative albeit a Democrat in conservative G.R. and (I think) a labor lawyer, but I’m not aware of any indication that he was champion of the downtrodden. [read post]
22 Jan 2015, 6:43 am
In April 2013, after the plaintiffs had left the employer, pursuant to an agreement with the Department of Labor, the employer began paying SDRs overtime. [read post]
8 May 2014, 4:00 am
Canada-Cameroon BIT signing; photo from DFATD In Hupacasath First Nation v. [read post]
29 Jan 2014, 10:49 am
According to the most recent Department of Labor guidance, the D.O.L. takes the position that putting on uniforms at the job site may also be included in the donning and duffing rule in some situations. [read post]
2 Jan 2014, 4:28 pm
v=j0pl_FXt0eMWilliam F. [read post]
