Resources

Client Alerts, News Articles, Blog Posts, & Multimedia

Everything you need to know about BMD and the industry.

CLIENT ALERT: Class Action Waivers in Employment Contracts Upheld by Supreme Court

Client Alert
May 24, 2018

On May 21, 2018, in a 5-4 decision and a major win for employers, the United States Supreme Court upheld the legality of waivers in employment contracts that prohibit employees from grouping claims together in collective or class actions in favor of individual arbitration proceedings. See Epic Sys. Corp. v. Lewis, ___U.S.___ (2018).

Employers have used these collective/class action waivers to protect against collective action wage and hour claims. Employees and the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) had challenged the legality of such provisions, arguing that they violate the National Labor Relations Act (the “NLRA”) prohibition against employers interfering with employees’ rights to engage in “concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection.” See 29 U.S.C. § 157.  Employers’ argued, under the Federal Arbitration Act (the “FAA”), that arbitration agreements entered into through a lawful contract must be upheld. 9 U.S.C. § 2. The United States Supreme Court resolved the conflict in favor of the FAA and employers.

Employers are encouraged to consult with their legal counsel to determine whether collective/class action waivers may be beneficial to their business or review waivers already in place to determine whether such waivers fit squarely in the United States Supreme Court’s recent decision. BMD’s employment attorneys are available for such consultation.  Should you have any questions regarding the United States Supreme Court’s decision or class/collective action waivers, please contact Adam D. Fuller at adfuller@bmdllc.com.

Labor LawNational Labor Relations BoardNational Labor Relations ActU.S. Supreme Court
Client Alert

Protecting Your Image in the Age of AI-Generated “Deepfakes”

April 8, 2025The rapid evolution of artificial intelligence (AI) has transformed how we create and consume digital content, but it also poses significant risks. Among the most troubling developments in AI is the proliferation of AI-generated fraudulent content, often called “deepfakes”.Client Alert

Tariffs, Market Downturn, and Employment Considerations for Employers

April 7, 2025As tariffs continue to impact various industries, employers must prepare for the ripple effects these economic pressures can have on workforce management. The economic impact can dramatically impact companies’ bottom lines, and companies look to improve finances and save for the future and many will choose to reduce employee count/wages.Client Alert

Corporate Transparency Act Overhauled: U.S. Entities No Longer Required to Report

March 24, 2025The Department of Treasury has issued an interim final rule significantly altering the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA). As of March 21, 2025, all U.S.-created entities and their beneficial owners are exempt from reporting requirements. Only non-U.S. entities registered to do business in the U.S. must still report, but they are not required to disclose U.S. citizen owners. Business owners should stay informed on these changes and consult legal counsel for compliance guidance.Client Alert

ODM to Implement Medicaid Work Requirements: What Providers and Medicaid Expansion Recipients Need to Know

March 21, 2025The Ohio Department of Medicaid (ODM) has submitted a waiver to impose work requirements for Medicaid expansion recipients. If approved, the new eligibility criteria will take effect on January 1, 2026. A federal public comment period is open until April 7, 2025.Client Alert

Ohio Appellate Court Rules in Favor of Gender-Affirming Care

March 19, 2025On March 18, 2025, the 10th District Court of Appeals in Franklin County ruled that Ohio’s House Bill (HB) 68, which restricts puberty blockers and hormone therapy for minors seeking gender-affirming care, violates the Health Care Freedom Amendment and is therefore unenforceable. The court found that the law unlawfully interferes with parental rights and medical decision-making. The case, Moe v. Yost, has been remanded, and Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost intends to appeal.
Older posts