�鶹��ý

Urges Trump Administration to Repeal and Replace

On December 16, 2016, the Federal Acquisition Regulatory (FAR) Council issued an interim final rule to implement the Establishing Paid Sick Leave for Federal Contractors executive order and the related final rule issued by the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) on September 30. The FAR Council rule took effect on January 1, 2017.

In response to a request for comments from the U.S. Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division, on Dec. 19, �鶹��ý notified the agency that improvements are needed to the way it collects wage data from construction contractors. The Wage and Hour Division is responsible for setting the prevailing wage rate for federal and federally assisted construction projects covered by the Davis-Bacon Act and currently uses wage surveys to collect wage data from contractors. The agency’s request for comments is a required part of the regulatory process as the agency seeks to extend the use of its current wage survey form (Form WD-10), which expires in 2017.

The U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts held in September that the shareholders and officers of a double-breasted (a.k.a. “dual-shop”) construction company can be indicted and could go to prison if the government proves they fraudulently misrepresented that their business was a lawful double-breasted operation with two separate companies. According to the indictment, the defendants, who failed to maintain the separateness of their two corporations, reported to the Massachusetts Laborers Benefit Funds (MLBF) the hours worked by employees of their union company but not their non-union company, and, based on these false reports, failed to make payments due to the MLBF.

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) recently issued updated enforcement guidance on national origin discrimination. The new guidance replaces its 2002 compliance manual section on that subject.

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) recently published a revised version of the Employment Eligibility Verification Form (Form I-9). The new form, dated 11/14/2016, will be required for use by all employers beginning on January 22, 2017. Until then, employers may continue to use the version dated 3/8/2013 or the new version.

Marcia Kellogg There are just some clients that your business cannot afford to have - you know who they are: the ones who are highly commodity-based and have limited experience, whose projects result in little or no profit, and who are a drain on your firm and its resources. Instead of trying to find projects that suit the firm, client-based firms identify clients with whom they can develop and nurture a partnership over time. It’s a philosophy that is primarily interested in owning the client, not the project. Most importantly, the focus of a client-based business is maintaining the relationship at all costs. Firms that align their cultures with the business goals and objectives of their clients realize a vast improvement in performance, because they have a true belief and purpose in the project and the client with whom they are working, and this spirit resonates throughout everything they do.

On November 22, a federal judge issued a nationwide injunction against the U.S. Department of Labor’s (DOL) overtime rule, which was scheduled to take effect on December 1, 2016. As a result of this court order, implementation of the rule is effectively halted. However, the injunction is a temporary measure that suspends the regulation until litigation comes to a close. DOL has said that it is currently “considering all of [its] legal options.” At this time, it is unclear if or when the rule will take effect.

A federal district court on November 16 issued a nationwide permanent injunction preventing implementation of the U.S. Department of Labor's (DOL) “persuader rule.” The ruling is good news for employers and for the associations, attorneys, and consultants that advise them on labor matters.

A contractor signatory to an old “me-too” agreement with an “evergreen” clause could be responsible for benefit and other fund contributions required by a later multiemployer collective bargaining agreement (a “CBA”) even though the contractor was not a member of the multiemployer group and did not grant continuous bargaining rights to the group, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (DE, NJ, PA) has held.