This week, we’re covering four key employer-focused developments: a ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit challenging the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB’s) authority, another Fifth Circuit decision restoring pregnant worker protections, the White House’s reversal of a key non-compete executive order, and a court ruling against the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC’s) early right-to-sue policy.

NLRB Authority in Jeopardy

The Fifth Circuit has ruled that the structure of the NLRB is likely unconstitutional, setting the stage for a potential U.S. Supreme Court review. Epstein Becker Green attorney Erin E. Schaefer tells us more.

Fifth Circuit Restores Pregnant Worker Protections

The Fifth Circuit also upheld the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA), reversing a lower court’s preliminary injunction. Employers must now ensure reasonable accommodations for pregnancy-related conditions under the PWFA.

White House Rescinds Non-Compete Order

The current administration has reversed President Biden’s 2021 executive order on expansive antitrust enforcement, signaling a return to a more traditional approach to competition reviews.

Court Strikes Down EEOC Right-to-Sue Policy

A federal court has ruled against the EEOC’s policy of automatically issuing early right-to-sue notices in discrimination cases, limiting the practice and its impact on claimants.

-

Download our Wage & Hour Guide for Employers app: https://www.ebglaw.com/wage-hour-guide-for-employers-app.

Visit our site for this week’s Other Highlights and links: https://www.ebglaw.com/eltw402

Subscribe to #WorkforceWednesday: https://www.ebglaw.com/eltw-subscribe

Visit http://www.EmploymentLawThisWeek.com

This podcast is presented by Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. All rights are reserved. This audio recording includes information about legal issues and legal developments. Such materials are for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal developments. These informational materials are not intended, and should not be taken, as legal advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances, and these materials are not a substitute for the advice of competent counsel. The content reflects the personal views and opinions of the participants. No attorney-client relationship has been created by this audio recording. This audio recording may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules. The determination of the need for legal services and the choice of a lawyer are extremely important decisions and should not be based solely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. No representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.

This week, we dig into the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit’s new Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) collective action notice standard, the U.S. Department of Labor’s (DOL’s) relaunched Payroll Audit Independent Determination (PAID) program, and the DOL’s scaled-back approach to wage and hour investigation penalties.

Seventh Circuit’s New Standard for FLSA Notice 

The Seventh Circuit has introduced the Richards framework, a middle-ground standard for FLSA collective actions. This decision deepens the circuit split over notices to potential plaintiffs and could lead to Supreme Court involvement. Learn how this could impact your compliance strategies.

DOL Relaunches PAID Program 

The DOL has relaunched the PAID program, letting employers self-report FLSA violations to avoid litigation or liquidated damages. The program now covers select Family and Medical Leave Act corrections. Discover how this voluntary option supports compliance.

Wage and Hour Investigation Penalties Scaled Back

A new DOL directive reduces penalties during wage and hour audits. Liquidated damages won’t apply in pre-litigation investigations but may still be pursued in litigation. See how this change could affect your risk management strategies. 

--

Download our Wage & Hour Guide for Employers app: https://www.ebglaw.com/wage-hour-guide-for-employers-app.

Visit our site for this week’s Other Highlights and links: https://www.ebglaw.com/eltw401

Subscribe to #WorkforceWednesday: https://www.ebglaw.com/eltw-subscribe

Visit http://www.EmploymentLawThisWeek.com

This podcast is presented by Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. All rights are reserved. This audio recording includes information about legal issues and legal developments. Such materials are for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal developments. These informational materials are not intended, and should not be taken, as legal advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances, and these materials are not a substitute for the advice of competent counsel. The content reflects the personal views and opinions of the participants. No attorney-client relationship has been created by this audio recording. This audio recording may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules. The determination of the need for legal services and the choice of a lawyer are extremely important decisions and should not be based solely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. No representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.

New guidance from Attorney General Bondi urges federal funding recipients to reassess DEI programs to ensure compliance with anti-discrimination laws. This memo highlights actions deemed “unlawful DEI,” including race-based scholarships, preferential hiring, and misapplied “neutral” criteria.

What This Means for Employers:

• Federal consequences: Noncompliance risks include funding revocation or False Claims Act liability.

• Beyond federal funding: Private employers should also review DEI policies for legal risks.

• Focused best practices: Ensure inclusive environments, prioritize skills and qualifications, and eliminate demographic-driven criteria.

Epstein Becker Green’s Lauri Rasnick unpacks these developments in this week’s Employment Law This Week®.

Visit our site for this week’s Other Highlights and links: https://www.ebglaw.com/eltw400

Subscribe to #WorkforceWednesday: https://www.ebglaw.com/eltw-subscribe

Visit http://www.EmploymentLawThisWeek.com

Download our Wage & Hour Guide for Employers app: https://www.ebglaw.com/wage-hour-guide-for-employers-app.

This podcast is presented by Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. All rights are reserved. This audio recording includes information about legal issues and legal developments. Such materials are for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal developments. These informational materials are not intended, and should not be taken, as legal advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances, and these materials are not a substitute for the advice of competent counsel. The content reflects the personal views and opinions of the participants. No attorney-client relationship has been created by this audio recording. This audio recording may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules. The determination of the need for legal services and the choice of a lawyer are extremely important decisions and should not be based solely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. No representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.

In Harrington v. Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, Inc., the Ninth Circuit ruled that, in FLSA collective actions, federal courts must evaluate personal jurisdiction before allowing notices to out-of-state employees in nationwide claims—a move that strengthens employers’ ability to challenge these cases.

Key Takeaways for Employers

• Jurisdiction matters: Courts must confirm jurisdiction before notifying out-of-state employees.

• Limited forum shopping: Plaintiffs face limits to filing in unrelated jurisdictions.

• Stronger grounds for employers: Employers can challenge out-of-state claims with no forum ties.
• Arbitration implications: Courts may notify employees under arbitration agreements.

In this episode of Employment Law This Week®, Epstein Becker Green attorney Courtney McFate describes the Harrington ruling and shares insights to help employers adapt and minimize costly lawsuits.

Visit our site for this week’s Other Highlights and links: https://www.ebglaw.com/eltw399

Subscribe to #WorkforceWednesday: https://www.ebglaw.com/eltw-subscribe

Visit http://www.EmploymentLawThisWeek.com

Download our Wage & Hour Guide for Employers app: https://www.ebglaw.com/wage-hour-guide-for-employers-app.

This podcast is presented by Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. All rights are reserved. This audio recording includes information about legal issues and legal developments. Such materials are for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal developments. These informational materials are not intended, and should not be taken, as legal advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances, and these materials are not a substitute for the advice of competent counsel. The content reflects the personal views and opinions of the participants. No attorney-client relationship has been created by this audio recording. This audio recording may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules. The determination of the need for legal services and the choice of a lawyer are extremely important decisions and should not be based solely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. No representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.

This week, we look at the potential restoration of a quorum at the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB” or “Board”), the U.S. Department of Labor’s (DOL’s) deregulatory initiatives, and lessons from a high-profile workplace incident at a Coldplay concert.

NLRB May Regain Quorum

Lacking a quorum, the NLRB is currently unable to issue decisions affecting workplace policies and disputes. On July 17, 2025, President Trump nominated two Republicans to fill vacant seats on the Board. Senate confirmation of the nominees is required to restore the Board’s authority and ensure continued guidance for employers.

DOL Begins Deregulation Push

The DOL’s deregulatory agenda could reshape compliance priorities for employers. Plans include 63 actions to roll back regulations and align with federal mandates.

Coldplay Concert Exposes Workplace Romance 

A viral “kiss cam” moment at a recent Coldplay concert led to the resignations of a CEO and a Chief People Officer and heightened legal exposure for their company. This is a reminder that employers must implement and consistently enforce relationship policies to prevent risk and uphold workplace credibility.

-- 

Download our Wage & Hour Guide for Employers app: https://www.ebglaw.com/wage-hour-guide-for-employers-app.

Visit our site for this week’s Other Highlights and links: https://www.ebglaw.com/eltw398

Subscribe to #WorkforceWednesday: https://www.ebglaw.com/eltw-subscribe

Visit http://www.EmploymentLawThisWeek.com

This podcast is presented by Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. All rights are reserved. This audio recording includes information about legal issues and legal developments. Such materials are for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal developments. These informational materials are not intended, and should not be taken, as legal advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances, and these materials are not a substitute for the advice of competent counsel. The content reflects the personal views and opinions of the participants. No attorney-client relationship has been created by this audio recording. This audio recording may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules. The determination of the need for legal services and the choice of a lawyer are extremely important decisions and should not be based solely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. No representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.

This week, we’re examining the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC’s) stance on a federal non-compete ban, the expansive changes introduced by Florida’s Contracts Honoring Opportunity, Investment, Confidentiality, and Economic Growth (CHOICE) Act, and a pivotal ruling by the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) on pension withdrawal liabilities.

FTC Delays Decision on Non-Compete Rule        

The FTC requested an additional 60 days to decide if it will continue defending the non-compete ban, suggesting the rule may soon be withdrawn.

Florida CHOICE Act Expands Non-Competes

Florida’s new CHOICE Act now allows non-compete agreements for covered employees to span up to four years, doubling the previous limit. The law also simplifies the process for employers to secure injunctive relief, making Florida one of the most employer-friendly states. 

SCOTUS to Rule on Pension Withdrawal Liability

SCOTUS will decide how pension withdrawal costs are calculated, which could mean significant financial changes for employers.

-

Download our Wage & Hour Guide for Employers app: https://www.ebglaw.com/wage-hour-guide-for-employers-app.

Visit our site for this week’s Other Highlights and links: https://www.ebglaw.com/eltw397

Subscribe to #WorkforceWednesday: https://www.ebglaw.com/eltw-subscribe

Visit http://www.EmploymentLawThisWeek.com

This podcast is presented by Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. All rights are reserved. This audio recording includes information about legal issues and legal developments. Such materials are for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal developments. These informational materials are not intended, and should not be taken, as legal advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances, and these materials are not a substitute for the advice of competent counsel. The content reflects the personal views and opinions of the participants. No attorney-client relationship has been created by this audio recording. This audio recording may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules. The determination of the need for legal services and the choice of a lawyer are extremely important decisions and should not be based solely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. No representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.

The OBBBA introduces major shifts for employers, transforming employee benefits, executive compensation, and workforce compliance. Are you prepared to adapt?

Essential Impacts for Employers

• Dependent care and education benefits—higher flexible spending account limits and tax-favored student loan repayment programs
• Health savings accounts—expanded eligibility and coverage options for employees
• Executive compensation rules—new tax implications for public companies and nonprofits

Epstein Becker Green attorneys Elliot Katz and Lucas Peterhans break down these updates in this episode of Employment Law This Week®. Get the insights you need to stay ahead of these sweeping changes.

Read more insights on the OBBBA from our benefits team: https://www.workforcebulletin.com/hot-dogs-fireworks-and-the-one-big-beautiful-bill-what-employers-need-to-know-about-the-employee-benefits-and-executive-compensation-changes

Visit our site for this week's Other Highlights and links: https://www.ebglaw.com/eltw396

Subscribe to #WorkforceWednesday: https://www.ebglaw.com/subscribe/

Visit http://www.EmploymentLawThisWeek.com

This podcast is presented by Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. All rights are reserved. This audio recording includes information about legal issues and legal developments. Such materials are for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal developments. These informational materials are not intended, and should not be taken, as legal advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances, and these materials are not a substitute for the advice of competent counsel. The content reflects the personal views and opinions of the participants. No attorney-client relationship has been created by this audio recording. This audio recording may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules. The determination of the need for legal services and the choice of a lawyer are extremely important decisions and should not be based solely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. No representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.

Non-compete legislation is evolving rapidly at the state level, with new laws taking effect soon in Arkansas, Kansas, Virginia, and Wyoming. Looking ahead, pending bills in over a dozen states could reshape how employers approach restrictive covenants.

In this episode, Epstein Becker Green attorneys Peter A. Steinmeyer, Daniel R. Levy, David J. Clark, and Carolyn O. Boucek discuss the new and proposed state non-compete laws and their implications for employers, as well as alternative tools that can be used to address these restrictions. From expanded protections for low-wage workers in Virginia to Kansas’s focus on non-solicit provisions, this episode offers actionable takeaways to help employers stay compliant.

Visit our site for this week’s other highlights and links: https://www.ebglaw.com/eltw395

Spilling Secrets is a special monthly podcast series about the future of non-compete and trade secrets law.

We invite you to view Employment Law This Week® – learn about significant developments in employment and labor law and workforce management in a matter of minutes every #WorkforceWednesday®.

Watch the series and subscribe for email notifications: http://www.EmploymentLawThisWeek.com.

These materials have been provided for informational purposes only and are not intended and should not be construed to constitute legal advice. The content of these materials is copyrighted to Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. EMPLOYMENT LAW THIS WEEK® and #WorkforceWednesday® are registered trademarks of Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. ATTORNEY ADVERTISING.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is ramping up worksite inspections and I-9 audits, presenting new challenges for employers nationwide. With no warning before an ICE visit, preparation is critical to minimizing risks and staying compliant.

This week’s key topics include:

·         maintaining current I-9 forms for employees,

·         developing a written playbook for ICE raids, and

·         establishing post-raid protocols to protect and stabilize operations.

Epstein Becker Green attorneys Jungmin Choi and Melissa Jampol join the show to provide practical guidance. From creating a proactive plan to knowing your rights during a raid, they break down the steps employers should take before, during, and after an ICE inspection to safeguard their operations.

Visit our site for this week's Other Highlights and links: https://www.ebglaw.com/eltw394

Subscribe to #WorkforceWednesday: https://www.ebglaw.com/subscribe/

Visit http://www.EmploymentLawThisWeek.com

This podcast is presented by Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. All rights are reserved. This audio recording includes information about legal issues and legal developments. Such materials are for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal developments. These informational materials are not intended, and should not be taken, as legal advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances, and these materials are not a substitute for the advice of competent counsel. The content reflects the personal views and opinions of the participants. No attorney-client relationship has been created by this audio recording. This audio recording may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules. The determination of the need for legal services and the choice of a lawyer are extremely important decisions and should not be based solely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. No representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.

On May 30, 2025, the DOL moved to eliminate the OFCCP, shifting key enforcement duties to other agencies. At the same time, the DOL has launched a new opinion letter program, expanding access beyond the Wage and Hour Division.

Employers must navigate these changes while maintaining compliance with federal, state, and local anti-discrimination laws. Epstein Becker Green attorneys Kim Carter and Paul DeCamp provide their insights into these shifts and their likely future impact on employers.

Visit our site for this week's Other Highlights and links: https://www.ebglaw.com/eltw393

Subscribe to #WorkforceWednesday: https://www.ebglaw.com/subscribe/

Visit http://www.EmploymentLawThisWeek.com

This podcast is presented by Epstein Becker & Green, P.C. All rights are reserved. This audio recording includes information about legal issues and legal developments. Such materials are for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal developments. These informational materials are not intended, and should not be taken, as legal advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances, and these materials are not a substitute for the advice of competent counsel. The content reflects the personal views and opinions of the participants. No attorney-client relationship has been created by this audio recording. This audio recording may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules. The determination of the need for legal services and the choice of a lawyer are extremely important decisions and should not be based solely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. No representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.