Weekly Industry News – Employment Law

October 17th, 2013 – The latest on ERISA, Goldman Sachs,  New York State’s Highest Court and more.  

High Court Hears Arguments on Accrual Of Limitations Periods in ERISA Plans by Jacklyn Wille Posted on Bloomberg BNA

In considering the date on which a disability plan’s contractual limitations period begins to run, the U.S. Supreme Court justices questioned attorneys on a wide range of issues, including federal law preemption, equitable doctrines, potential harm and the purpose of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act’s administrative exhaustion requirement (Heimeshoff v. Hartford Life & Accident Ins. Co., U.S., No. 12-729, argued 10/15/13)…. [ Read More ]

Was Washington Whistleblower’s Layoff Retaliation? by  Gordon Gibb Posted on Lawyers and Settlements

Hanford, WA: A Washington state man who maintained a 44-year career with URS Corp. was one of five employees laid off from the firm due to apparent budgetary constraints. However, Walter Tamosaitis wonders if the loss of his job after so many years reaches back to previous concerns he raised with his former employer over safety and design issues at the plant where he was based. Was his layoff retaliation, and thus an affront to Washington State Employment Laws?… [ Read More ]  

Goldman Sachs ordered to turn over internal complaints conceivably related to gender bias by Marjorie Johnson, J.D. Posted on Employmentlawdaily.com

Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (GS) must turn over internal gender-bias complaints by female workers to lawyers representing women in a lawsuit alleging the firm discriminated against them in pay and promotions. U.S. Magistrate Judge James Francis in Manhattan ruled yesterday that all complaints “conceivably related” to discrimination against women in the investment banking, securities, investment management and merchant banking divisions at Goldman Sachs must be shared with the attorneys, including the names of those who complained…. [ Read More ]  

New York State’s Highest Court Confirms that a Request for Indefinite Leave May Constitute a Reasonable Accommodation Under the New York City Human Rights Law by Michael S. Arnold Posted on jdsupra.com

The New York Court of Appeals – New York’s highest court – is out with a new decision this week addressing our favorite statutory friend (foe?), the New York City Human Rights Law – this time in the context of a disability discrimination claim. In a word, the court, in Romanello v. Intesa Sanpaolo, refused to create a bright line rule that an employee’s request for an indefinite leave of absence to accommodate a disability is per se unreasonable under the City Law. This stands in contrast to the judicially-created rule that such requests are unreasonable under the New York State Human Rights Law and the federal Americans with Disabilities Act… [ Read More ]  

 Related Events 

  Employment Practices Liability Insurance     False Claims and Qui Tam Enforcement         Wage & Hour For a complete list of all employment law related events: Click Here