United States: Scalia To Take Labor Department Reins: What Does It Mean For Employers?

The news that President Trump selected Eugene Scalia to take over as Labor Secretary late last week caught some employers by surprise; after all, it was just a week ago that we were analyzing the track record of the soon-to-be-acting Secretary who many expected to helm the Department of Labor for an extended period of time. But now that it appears we have a likely successor in place to take over for Alexander Acosta, all employers are turning their attention to the same issue: what does this transition mean for the business community? We’ve once again assembled the opinions of some of our firm’s foremost thought leaders – including one of our partners who recently worked side-by-side with Scalia on a significant workplace law matter – to help provide a glimpse into what you should expect from the U.S. Department of Labor. The consensus opinion? Scalia will aggressively battle against intrusive and overreaching regulations that hamstring the country’s employers, and will quickly endear himself to the business community.

The Basics: What Does The USDOL Do?

The Secretary of Labor is a Cabinet-level position heading the U.S. Department of Labor (USDOL), one of the federal agencies that has the widest and deepest impact on employers across the country. The agency impacts the inner workings of the American workplace on a daily basis. It enforces laws involving employers and unions, and more importantly, develops binding regulations and directives for a variety of workplace laws. It encompasses over 30 agencies, boards, offices, and programs that each have a specialized role when it comes to labor and employment law.

The three most commonly known agencies and offices within the USDOL are the Wage and Hour Division (WHD), the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP). However, the USDOL also has a role to play with respect to family leave, joint employment, pay equity, and immigration law; employers may also be interested to follow the goings-on which will take place at the Office of Labor-Management Standards (OLMS) – an office that could play a vital role over unionized workplaces in the coming years.

Who Will Be Taking Over?

Assuming the Republican-led Senate approves the choice, your next Secretary of Labor will be Eugene Scalia. If his name sounds familiar, that’s because he is the son of the former Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who passed away in 2016.

Unlike the acting Secretary Patrick Pizzella, who assumed the role on July 19 and will remain the temporary chief of the department until the confirmation process is complete, Scalia has only briefly served in the federal government and instead spent the majority of his professional life in private law practice. During this time, Fisher Phillips partner Travis Vance (co-chair of the firm’s Workplace Safety and Catastrophe Management Practice Group) worked with Scalia as co-counsel on a significant regulation amendment project with national implications. His opinion? “Gene is brilliant,” says Vance. “He’s one of the most insightful and gifted attorneys with whom I’ve had the privilege to work. He has developed quite the career advising clients on issues relating to the federal agency rulemaking process. This will serve him well at the Department of Labor. I expect him to use his significant experience representing clients in this field and take a practical approach to amending and repealing regulations that may have been improperly adopted or overreach.”

Scalia’s credentials are impeccable. He has a law degree from the University of Chicago and received his MBA from the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania. For the majority of his career, he has worked for a large and well-respected law firm in Washington, D.C. and Los Angeles, focusing his practice on labor and employment law and administrative law. However, he has had three brief stints in federal government service.

Soon after graduating law school, he spent two years as an aide to Education Secretary William Bennett during the Reagan administration. Several years later, during the George H.W. Bush administration, he worked as Special Assistant to Attorney General William Barr for a little more than a year. And finally, in 2002, he was the solicitor of the Department of Labor for 12 months, serving as the chief legal office for the department he is now about to lead.

Pay Equity And Affirmative Action

The big question on most employers’ minds right now is the status of the revised EEO-1 reports and whether you will need to produce a mountain of pay data and hours-worked information (Component 2 data) for both 2017 and 2018 by the current September 30, 2019 deadline. While the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has, to date, been at the forefront of the fight against this cumbersome requirement, an energized USDOL could also play a role. “The EEO-1 reports are actively used by both the EEOC and by the USDOL,” says Cheryl Behymer, co-chair of the Fisher Phillips Pay Equity Practice Group, which means that the Labor Department could also insert itself into the legal fight over the validity of the beefed-up EEO-1 reports. Behymer reminds us that the while the initiative is within the purview of the EEOC and not the USDOL, it was spurred in part by a presidential memorandum directing the USDOL to increase data collection related to wages and gender. So what could this latest development mean for the impending pay data requirements?

“Scalia has demonstrated himself to be somewhat of a warrior against overreaching regulations that overburden the business community,” Behymer says. “And if there has ever been a more burdensome and overreaching regulation than the beefed-up EEO-1 reports, I haven’t seen it in my lifetime. If Scalia could somehow navigate a stay of this requirement, he would immediately endear himself to the business community.”

Behymer notes that a decision to either force an emergency hearing on the pending appeal to push for a stay to be reinstated, or taking any other procedural step that would relieve employers from this looming deadline – as the portal for uploading the information opened last week in advance of the fast-approaching September 30 deadline – would need to happen quickly for it to be effective. “While most employers are waiting to begin producing the pay data to the government in the hopes that the regulation will be put on ice or struck down, the clock is ticking, and there’s not much more time to wait.”

Behymer also chairs the firm’s Affirmative Action and Federal Contract Compliance Practice Group. In this capacity, she and others in the firm help employers doing business with the federal government (federal contractors and subcontractors) comply with certain nondiscrimination laws, especially those enforced by the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP). According to Behymer, federal contractors would benefit by a decision to rescind the 3,500 Corporate Scheduling Announcement Letter (CSAL) letters issued in March 2019 notifying them that they have been selected for an audit during the upcoming cycle. “Instead,” Behymer says, “Scalia may require the OFCCP to direct its efforts to increasing training opportunities for federal contractors, instead of diverting such significant resources to enforcement activities.”

Workplace Safety

With respect to OSHA and workplace safety and health issues, you can expect the agency to focus more on compliance assistance to balance against enforcement activities under Scalia’s leadership. That’s according to Edwin Foulke, Jr., former head of OSHA during the Bush administration (April 2006 to November 2008), and a partner in the Fisher Phillips Workplace Safety and Catastrophe Management Practice Group. And Foulke believes that Scalia has the background to get things done at the agency level.

“Having been the Labor Solicitor,” Foulke says, “Scalia is well aware of the regulatory process and will be able to move whatever pending standards he want to move.” Foulke estimates that the career government officials installed at the Labor Department will be less likely to oppose Scalia’s initiatives given that they will trust he will know how to get things done.  

Scalia already has direct experience waging battles against intrusive safety regulations. Foulke points to the battle Scalia fought in 2000 against the proposed ergonomic standard that the Clinton administration wanted to put in place. Scalia led the charge against this regulation, calling it a “vague and subjective rule” that “would afford little benefit to workers because it is based on thoroughly unreliable science.” The rule was quickly scrapped by Congress but the battle “cemented Scalia as a strong advocate for the business community,” said Foulke.

Wage And Hour Division

One area that may not see a radical change in direction is wage and hour law. That’s according to Ted Boehm, a partner who practices in the firm’s Wage and Hour Law Practice Group. “We have a pretty good idea of the Labor Department’s regulatory agenda as it relates to upcoming wage-hour activity,” he says. “What we don’t know yet is how Scalia will prioritize that agenda. With one notable exception: it seems a safe bet that the USDOL will issue its final version of the “overtime rule” so that it will take effect by January 2020, the estimated effective date in the earlier proposed rule.”

Joint Employment

Several months ago, the USDOL proposed a four-factor balancing test that it wants used to determine whether companies are joint employers – equally liable for liability under federal wage and hour laws. If adopted, it may result in fewer businesses being found liable for minimum wage, overtime, and other similar liability under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The proposed rule is intended to reduce uncertainty and inconsistency in court and agency decisions with respect to joint employer status. However, according to John Polson, chair of the firm’s Staffing and Contingent Workers Practice Group and a member of the firm’s Management Committee, the language of the proposed rule needs refinement in order to accomplish those goals with respect to Professional Employer Organizations (PEO) and other human resources outsourcing organizations. 

Polson notes that the proposed rule implies that a single factor in the four-factor balancing test, such as the basic act of maintaining employment records, may be sufficient to establish joint employer status. The proposed rule also contains several “catch-all” provisions that may support joint employer status even when the four-factor test does not lead to a joint employer finding. If these issues are not addressed, the proposed rule could lead to more uncertainty and inconsistency, not less, in the context of PEO and human resources outsourcing. 

Family And Medical Leave

As a management-side employment lawyer who has spent a career representing businesses and associations seeking to strike down or limit regulations considered to be overreaching, Scalia might drive the agency to propose new Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) regulations that might reduce the administrative burdens on employers while still protecting employees’ rights to take leave. That’s according to Christine Howard, one of the partners on the firm’s Management Committee who regularly advises and defends employers on FMLA matters.

She says she expects Scalia’s experience in defending FMLA claims and related leave laws to place him “ahead of the curve” understanding the administrative burdens imposed by the FMLA regulations. “Given his know-how in narrowing the reach of expansive regulations,” Howard says, “the USDOL might take a hard look at the more onerous FMLA regulatory requirements that exceed what he believes the law permits his agency to impose.”

Likewise, Howard expects that Scalia will continue the recent resurgence of opinion letters being issued by the USDOL. “Employers have welcomed the agency’s renewed role in providing direction on a myriad of complex FMLA issues, which had ceased under the prior administration,” she says. “I see no reason why that would stop under Scalia’s leadership.”


While most employers are aware of the involvement of the federal government in workplace immigration matters, not all are aware of the fact that the USDOL plays a role in enforcing federal immigration policy. And according to Shanon Stevenson, co-chair of the Fisher Phillips Global Immigration Practice Group, there could be a slight change in focus under Scalia’s leadership. “We expect worksite enforcement actions, including audits of employers’ H-1B, H-2B, and H-2A programs, to continue at their current heightened levels. However, we do expect more efficient resolutions of audits under Scalia.”

The USDOL is responsible for processing quite a few immigration-related programs. It handles the Labor Condition Application step, which is a prerequisite to the filing of the H-1B with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). With respect to green card cases, the USDOL handles the PERM/Labor Certification process, which is the first step in most of the employment-based green card cases. Stevenson believes this is another area where things could change under new leadership. “He may tackle the overbroad and sometimes poorly drafted immigration statutes relied on by the government,” she says. “He may be the one that finally modernizes the process and system employers now use to file PERMs, including simplifying the steps involved in recruiting U.S. workers and what actions an employer needs to take to get the PERM approved.”

Office Of Labor-Management Standards

“You have to remember that Scalia is a management-side labor lawyer,” says Todd Lyon, co-chair of the Fisher Phillips Labor Relations Practice Group. “Given his long background as an advocate for employers, I have every reason to believe he will position the USDOL, to the extent he can, to again strike a balance and even the playing field to give employers the benefit of the doubt.” But you may be asking yourself: what does the USDOL have to do with traditional labor law? 

Most employers are unfamiliar with the Office of Labor-Management Standards (OLMS), an office in the USDOL charged with the mundane-sounding task of managing the receipt of funds by labor unions. However, it has the power to investigate union payments to ensure they are legitimate. And while this office has generally steered clear of controversy and made little impact on the business community in recent years, Lyon expects things could be different under Scalia. “As a management-side advocate, I’m sure Scalia has been witness to unions’ expenditures for political reasons, especially when employees have had no say whether they want their dues monies used for those purposes. And he could decide enough is enough and take a tougher stance on these activities,” says Lyon. And what kind of impact would that have? It would help both employers and workers, Lyon says. “Greater transparency in this area will allow employees the ability to decide whether union leaders are appropriately spending their money, which can only be a good thing.”


We will continue to monitor further developments at the USDOL and provide updates regarding all of these matters of interest, so you should ensure you are subscribed to Fisher Phillips’ alert system to gather the most up-to-date information. If you have questions, please contact your Fisher Phillips attorney.

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.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions