Royal

Vaccine Mandates Present a Unique Test for Employers

Oct 29, 2021

A New Kind of Challenge

The COVID-19 pandemic has tested area employers in every way imaginable. And soon, it will test many in a way that probably couldn’t have been imagined even a few months ago — vaccine mandates put in place by the Biden administration and set to take effect probably before the end of the year. The mandates are prompting lawsuits, generating questions that are often hard to answer, and creating high levels of anxiety for employers who are already dealing with a host of problems, especially an ongoing workforce crisis.


Amy Royal says she’s seen all manner of new regulations — state, federal, and local — that employers and their HR departments must contend with as they carry out business day to day.

But she speaks for all employment-law specialists — and those HR professionals as well — when she says she’s never seen anything quite like the COVID-19 vaccine mandates either already in effect or soon to be.


The mandates are far-reaching in their impact, in terms of everything from the number of businesses affected to the costs they will have to absorb to the very real possibility of losing more valued employees, said Royal, a principal with the Indian Orchard-based Royal Law Firm, which specializes in employment law, specifically representing employers. She summed up the measures and their bearing on employers with a single word. “It’s exhausting for companies.”


That would be an understatement.


Already, vaccine mandates enacted by states, individual cities and towns, healthcare providers, and private companies are resulting in thousands of people being fired or simply walking off the job. That list includes the football coach and several assistants at Washington State University, more than 100 state troopers in Massachusetts, police officers in countless communities, and a wide range of healthcare workers, especially nurses.


The recent developments raise questions on everything from just how safe many cities now are to which games NBA star Kyrie Irving can actually play in — none at his home court in Brooklyn, for starters.


And the next shoe — a rather large one — is set to drop in this unfolding drama. That would be the Biden administration’s vaccine and testing mandates, the ones affecting companies of more than 100 employees, any business with federal contracts, and federal employees — mandates the administration estimates will impact more than 80 million workers.


Royal and other employment-law specialists we spoke with said there are far more businesses in the 413 in those categories than most people would think, and all of them are, or should be, working diligently to prepare for these mandates — which will take effect soon, although exactly when is a question.


Click here to read the full article published by BusinessWest.


Please contact the attorneys at The Royal Law Firm if you have any questions about vaccine mandates, or any other employment law topics at 413-586-2288.

ALERT: EEOC Releases Workplace Guidance to Prevent Harassment

01 May, 2024
On April 29 th , 2024, the U.S. Equal Opportunity Commission (EEOC) finalized their guidance in harassment in the workplace after receiving and responding to nearly 38,000 public comments on the proposed guidance released on October 2, 2023. The renewed guidance provides numerous clarifying hypotheticals, and addresses more recent issues including protections for LGBTIQA+ employees and remote work. Of note, the EEOC clarified the scope of sex discrimination and harassment, stating that federal protections under Title VII extend to LGBTIQA+ employees. Specifically, the EEOC made clear that the scope of harassment extends to repeatedly and intentionally misgendering employees or denying access to bathroom facilities that align with their gender identity. Further, this guidance reminds employers that discrimination and harassment based on “sex” includes harassment based on pregnancy, childbirth and related medical conditions, which include employees’ decisions related to contraception and abortion. Several public comments suggested that these guidelines infringed on free speech and religious rights. The EEOC did not directly address these concerns, instead stating that free speech and religious rights issues are fact-specific and would be addressed on a case-by-case basis. Further, the EEOC updated guidance related to the remote work environment. The EEOC clarified that conduct in a virtual work environment, including electronic communications using private phones, computers, or social media accounts can contribute to a hostile work environment if they impact the workplace. The EEOC also clarified that conduct occurring outside of the workplace, including on social media, which does not target the employer or its employees and is not brought into the workplace generally will not contribute to a hostile work environment. Finally, the EEOC updated its Anti-Harassment Policy Requirements, stating that an anti-harassment and discrimination policy should be widely disseminated to employees, in a manner that is understandable by all employees and includes i) a definition of prohibited conduct, ii) a requirement that supervisors report harassment, iii) multiple avenues for reporting harassment, iv) a statement that clearly identifies accessible points of contact for reporting purposes, and v) an explanation of the complaint process, including adequate anti-retaliation and confidentiality protections, and prompt and effective investigation and corrective action. You can read more about the EEOC's ruling on their website by clicking here . If your business has any questions on this topic or any other matters, please do not hesitate to contact the attorneys at The Royal Law Firm at 413-586-2288.

Non-Compete Agreements Are in Jeopardy

26 Apr, 2024
On April 23, 2024, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) issued a final rule banning non-competition agreements for all employees except for very narrow exceptions. The FTC’s Final Rule banning all non-competition agreements is effective 120 days after its publication in the Federal Register, which is expected in the next few days.  As of the effective date, all non-competition agreements are banned, except for franchisor/franchisee relationships and for sales of a business between buyer and seller. The FTC’s Rule is retroactive, prohibiting certain non-competition agreements before the effective date of the Rule as well. Existing non-competition agreements can remain in effect as to senior executives, which are defined in the Rule as employees in “policy-making positions” making at least $151,164 annually. The FTC’s Final Rule is already being challenged through the court system and a challenge from the Chamber of Commerce will most likely follow suit. Therefore, if an employer has existing non-competition agreements, the employer may not need to rescind them just yet. Stay tuned for updates as these challenges take their due course.
Share by: