464 results found

In Kliskey v. Making Opportunity Count, Inc., 2025 WL 959257 (D. Mass. 2025), Carol Kliskey claimed that Making Opportunity Count, Inc. (MOC), her former employer and a private non-profit organization...

The Delaware Supreme Court has reinstated the groundbreaking compensation package Tesla provided to Elon Musk...

By a 2-1 vote along party lines, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is moving ahead with its proposal to eliminate workforce demographic data requirements. EEO-1 applies to employers with 100 or more employees and some federal contractors, and EEO-2 through EEO-6 impose similar requirements on labor unions, public schools, and state and local government employers.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit issued a split decision, reversing a lower federal court's finding that two school employees lacked standing to bring a First Amendment claim against the school district.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a pay discrimination and retaliation suit filed against an Alabama public school by its athletic director. Connie L. Morris claimed that the Bessemer City School District underpaid her following her promotion from P.E. teacher to athletic director and retaliated against her.

The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals has adopted a unique position concerning the exhaustion of administrative remedies in Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) litigation.

The Treasury Department and IRS have issued new guidance on employer contributions to Trump Accounts, the tax-advantaged investment accounts for children created under President Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill. Employers can now make tax-free contributions of up to $2,500 annually to these Section 530A accounts for employees or their dependents, subject to specific plan requirements and non-discrimination rules.

A Georgia federal district court has granted preliminary approval to a $47.7 million class action settlement resolving a decade-long dispute between NCR Corp. and approximately 189 former executives. The case centers on allegations that the software company breached its contractual obligation to provide lifetime annuity payments to retired executives...

As HR professionals increasingly use AI tools for new purposes, employment attorneys are warning them to retain a human element when delivering layoff news to employees.

The Internal Revenue Service has announced significant increases to Affordable Care Act penalty levels for 2027, with employers facing substantially higher costs for non-compliance with healthcare coverage requirements.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed a trial court's dismissal of a class action lawsuit in which group health plan participants alleged that the insurer violated...

Prudential Insurance Co. of America recently filed an appellate brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, arguing that the lower federal district court correctly granted summary judgment in a class action lawsuit.

According to a recent Harris Poll and KinderCare Learning Companies survey, 8 out of 10 human resources (HR) professionals report difficulties convincing senior executives that investing in childcare benefits for workers...

A Texas federal judge has finalized a permanent injunction preventing the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) from enforcing Biden-era rules against two religious groups.

A bipartisan coalition of legislators, led by the leaders of the Senate Finance Committee, has reintroduced a major pharmacy benefit manager (PBM) regulation bill in Congress.

Thirteen Blue Cross and Blue Shield (BCBS) carriers are suing CVS Health over the prices it charges for some generic drugs in its $4 drug program. The insurance carriers claim that CVS improperly manipulated the “usual and customary prices” of those drugs.

United Healthcare and three Georgia medical providers have reached a settlement in their dispute over out-of-network reimbursement claims, ending litigation that centered on whether ERISA plan terms govern provider payments or if providers could demand higher charges. The case involved pre-No Surprises Act claims and highlighted the ongoing tension between health insurers and medical providers over payment methodologies for out-of-network services.