We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy. Learn more here.Close Me
As we
reported earlier, a former Harper's Bazaar unpaid intern is
pursuing a lawsuit against publisher The Hearst Corporation in
which she claims (among other things) to have been an
"employee" under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act who
was not compensated in compliance with that law.
A New York federal judge has now conditionally approved the case as a "collective
action". This means that the lawsuit will proceed as the
FLSA's version of a class action, including that
court-authorized notice of the complaint will be sent to potential
class members to let them know that they may join the lawsuit if
they choose to do so.
The court ruled that Xuedan Wang had presented enough evidence
to justify allowing the case to move forward on this basis for the
time being. Among the allegations of which the court took
note are that Hearst decided that all interns working at 19
magazines were non-employees but used them to complete tasks
necessary to its operations, such as answering telephones, making
deliveries, and organizing clothing and accessories. Wang
also asserts that Hearst required interns to submit "credit
letters" from colleges, some of which, she says, required the
intern to make a payment to his or her college in order to receive
the credit. She contends that she and other interns were
essentially entry-level employees who performed commensurate work
with little supervision.
Of course, these are simply Wang's claims. And after
further factual development, Hearst can try to convince the court
that treating the case as a collective action is not warranted
after all. Nevertheless, this litigation bears watching,
because it might well serve as a template for similar FLSA lawsuits
across the nation.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
A female employee traveling for her employer met a "friend" and at her motel room with him became "injured whilst engaging in sexual intercourse when a glass light fitting above the bed was pulled from its mount and fell on her."
The "just cause" standard has long been a cornerstone of traditional labor law (under many collective bargaining agreements, employees generally cannot be discharged except with "just cause").
The Affordable Care Act provides employees who are not offered health coverage by their employers with the option of purchasing health coverage through new health insurance marketplaces (also known as health insurance exchanges) that will operate in every state.
Beginning in 2014, the Affordable Care Act will require "large" employers to offer their full-time employees healthcare coverage that meets certain standards or pay a penalty.
The Affordable Care Act’s employer shared responsibility rules will require large employers to make an offer of minimum essential coverage to at least 95% of their full-time employees or pay a non-deductible excise tax on all their full-time employees.
The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) defines marriage at the federal level as a legal union between one man and one woman and excuses states from any obligation to recognize same-sex marriages recognized in any other state.
Employers have until October 1, 2013, to provide notice to current employees of coverage options available through the Health Insurance Marketplace established under the Affordable Care Act.
Issues After The Election
