Advanced search Help
Searching for terms: EXACT: "Shimabukuro, Jon O." in: author
Clear all search criteria
Only 2/3! You are seeing results from the Public Collection, not the complete Full Collection. Sign in to search everything (see eligibility).
-
Unemployment Compensation (UC): Issues Related to Drug Testing [Updated November 4, 2019]
From the Document: "Recent interest in Unemployment Compensation (UC) drug testing has grown at both the federal and state levels. The policy interest in mandatory drug testing of individuals who are applying for or receiving UC benefits parallels two larger policy trends. First, some state legislatures have considered drug testing individuals receiving public assistance benefits. While UC is generally considered social insurance (rather than public assistance), the concept of drug testing UC recipients (who are receiving state-financed benefits from a program authorized under state laws) could be interpreted as a potential extension of this state-level interest. Second, over recent years, Congress has considered issues related to UC program integrity, including drug testing, which may be viewed as addressing UC program integrity concerns. [...] Some stakeholders also expressed concern that expanded UC drug testing could create barriers to UC benefit receipt among eligible individuals and discourage UC claims filing. Stakeholders have also raised at least two legal concerns with the new final UC drug testing rule: (1) some commenters have argued that the new final rule may violate the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, and (2) some commenters have argued that the new final rule improperly delegates authority to the states to identify occupations that regularly conduct drug testing. Other policy issues to consider related to expanding UC drug testing include administrative concerns, such as state establishment of a drug testing program for UC claimants as well as the potential provision of and funding for drug treatment services."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Isaacs, Katelin P., 1980-; Carpenter, David Hatcher; Whittaker, Julie M. . . .
2019-11-04
-
NLRB Rejects Former Standards Following Appointment of New Members [January 18, 2018]
"With two new members appointed by President Trump, a newly constituted National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or Board) issued a series of significant decisions in the waning days of 2017. These decisions overturned several rulings issued during the Obama Administration that were heavily criticized by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and others in the business community. Two NRLB decisions in particular - 'Hy-Brand Industrial Contractors, Ltd.' and 'PCC Structurals, Inc.' - are notable because they reversed earlier rulings, which had prompted the introduction of legislation in the 115th Congress - the Save Local Business Act (H.R. 3441) and the Representation Fairness Restoration Act (S. 1217/H.R. 2629) - aimed at wiping out the Obama-era rulings. In light of these recent decisions, proponents of the bills could conclude that further consideration of the measures is not needed. However, because the bills would prescribe additional standards beyond what was addressed by the Board, some might contend that enactment of the legislation is still warranted."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Shimabukuro, Jon O.
2018-01-18
-
Equal Rights Amendment: Close to Adoption? [Updated November 13, 2019]
From the Document: "The recent election of Democratic majorities in both chambers of the Virginia legislature has prompted new discussion of the state ratifying the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) to the U.S. Constitution when it convenes in January. In 2018, efforts to ratify the amendment were narrowly defeated in the state House and Senate. First presented to the states in 1972, the ERA provides that '[e]quality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State on account of sex.' 37 states have now ratified the ERA, and some supporters of the amendment maintain that ratification by just one additional state could result in its adoption. After ratification by one more state, the ERA will have been ratified by three-fourths of the states, as required by Article V of the Constitution. Whether the ERA can be so adopted, however, is not entirely certain. Questions concerning the expiration of Congress's original ratification deadline without approval by three-fourths of the states, and the rescission of ratifications by five states between 1973 and 1978, would likely have to be addressed before the ERA would be formally adopted."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Shimabukuro, Jon O.
2019-11-13
-
Categories of Federal Civil Service Employment: A Snapshot [March 26, 2019]
From the Document: "The federal government is the nation's largest employer, with over two million workers employed in the United States, U.S. Territories, and foreign countries. A majority of these employees work in the competitive service of the executive branch. Applicants for competitive service positions compete with other applicants and are evaluated according to objective standards. The executive branch includes two other service classifications--the excepted service and the Senior Executive Service (SES)--with hiring and removal standards that diverge from those prescribed for the competitive service. Positions in the excepted service are specifically excepted from the competitive service by statute, by the President, or by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM). SES positions are also not in the competitive service. The SES includes senior managerial, supervisory, and policy positions that are subject to a different pay scale, as well as different hiring and removal standards. This report examines the three service classifications, and reviews some of the central features and notable differences among these classifications."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Shimabukuro, Jon O.; Staman, Jennifer A.
2019-03-26
-
Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB): A Legal Overview [March 25, 2019]
From the Document: "The Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB or Board) is a quasi-judicial independent agency in the executive branch charged with protecting federal employees against improper employmentrelated actions. The Board works to ensure, for example, that federal agencies avoid taking arbitrary action against employees, exhibiting favoritism, or engaging in reprisals against whistleblowers. The MSPB also aims to promote an effective federal workforce free of certain types of discrimination and other prohibited personnel practices. While the Board mainly carries out its mission through adjudication of federal employment-related disputes, it also performs specified oversight functions related to federal employment, including conducting special studies of the civil service and other executive branch merit systems."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Shimabukuro, Jon O.; Staman, Jennifer A.; Staman, Jennifer
2019-03-25
-
Congressional Responses to Selected Work Stoppages in Professional Sports [August 11, 2011]
"Prior to the 2011 National Football League (NFL) lockout, developments in professional football's labor-management relations had prompted questions regarding how, when, and in what manner a new collective bargaining agreement (CBA) might be drafted. Interest in this matter included, on the part of some observers, questions about how Congress responded to previous work stoppages in professional sports. In attempting to address this particular question, this report examines congressional responses to the 1982 and 1987 work stoppages in the NFL. With the conclusion of the 2011 NFL lockout in July, this work stoppage is also included. Additionally, this report examines the 1994 Major League Baseball strike, which is useful considering the extent of congressional activity surrounding this strike. Compared to the 1994 baseball strike, the 1982 and 1987 football strikes and the 2011 lockout did not garner much attention from Congress in terms of legislative measures and hearings. Three legislative measures were introduced in response to the 1982 strike; one each was introduced in response to the 1987 strike and the 2011 lockout. Members introduced or offered 22 legislative measures and held five hearings that were related to the baseball strike. […] Disagreeing that congressional intervention was warranted, other Members offered several reasons why Congress ought not to intervene. For example, one Member suggested that repealing baseball's antitrust exemption would alter the balance of power in professional baseball. Other Members believed that more pressing matters deserved Congress's attention. At least one Member suggested that a particular bill, if enacted, would have the effect of favoring the players over the owners."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Halchin, L. Elaine; Murray, Justin; Shimabukuro, Jon O.
2011-08-11
-
Congressional Responses to Selected Work Stoppages in Professional Sports [September 17, 2012]
"Prior to the 2011 National Football League (NFL) lockout, developments in professional football's labor-management relations had prompted questions regarding how, when, and in what manner a new collective bargaining agreement (CBA) might be drafted. Interest in this matter included, on the part of some observers, questions about how Congress responded to previous work stoppages in professional sports. In attempting to address this particular question, this report examines congressional responses to the 1982 and 1987 work stoppages in the NFL. With the conclusion of the 2011 NFL lockout in July, this work stoppage is also included. Additionally, this report examines the 1994 Major League Baseball strike, which is useful considering the extent of congressional activity surrounding this strike."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Halchin, L. Elaine; Murray, Justin; Shimabukuro, Jon O.
2012-09-17
-
Ebola: Selected Legal Issues [December 16, 2014]
"Several West African countries are currently grappling with an unprecedented outbreak of Ebola virus disease (EVD). Here in the United States, where Ebola is not endemic, a handful of EVD cases have been diagnosed, and domestic transmission of the virus has occurred in only two cases to date. This report provides a brief overview of selected legal issues regarding measures to prevent transmission of Ebola virus and the civil rights of individuals affected by the disease. Quarantine and isolation are restrictions on a person's movement, imposed to prevent the spread of contagious disease. The federal government has jurisdiction over interstate and border quarantine, carried out by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). However, primary quarantine authority typically resides with state health departments and health officials. Every state has the authority to pass and enforce quarantine laws as an exercise of its police powers, but these laws may vary widely by state. State and federal quarantine or isolation orders may be subject to suits alleging inadequate due process or violations of equal protection, but modern legal challenges to quarantine and isolation orders are not extensive. […] The use of these measures to contain the spread of Ebola may raise a classic civil rights issue: to what extent can an individual's liberty be curtailed to advance the common good? In addition to the constitutional issues noted above, discrimination against individuals with an infectious disease may be covered by Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), or the Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA). While quarantine and isolation effectively minimize Ebola exposure, they may also raise various employment concerns, particularly for those workers who fear losing their jobs or wages if they are forced to comply with a quarantine or isolation order. Infected workers may also be protected under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) if it can be established that they have a serious health condition, and employers whose employees could face workplace exposure to Ebola virus may be obligated to comply with applicable Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requirements."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Cole, Jared P.; Perry, Rodney M.; Dolan, Alissa M. . . .
2014-12-16
-
What Does the Gig Economy Mean for Workers? [February 5, 2016]
From the Summary: "The 'gig economy' is the collection of markets that match providers to consumers on a gig (or job) basis in support of on-demand commerce. In the basic model, gig workers enter into formal agreements with on-demand companies (e.g., Uber, TaskRabbit) to provide services to the company's clients. Prospective clients request services through an Internet-based technological platform or smartphone application that allows them to search for providers or to specify jobs. Providers (i.e., gig workers) engaged by the on-demand company provide the requested service and are compensated for the jobs. Recent trends in on-demand commerce suggest that gig workers may represent a growing segment of the U.S. labor market. In response, some Members of Congress have raised questions, for example, about the size of the gig workforce, how workers are using gig work, and the implications of the gig economy for labor standards and livelihoods more generally."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Donovan, Sarah A.; Bradley, David H.; Shimabukuro, Jon O.
2016-02-05
-
Survey of Federal Whistleblower and Anti-Retaliation Laws [April 22, 2013]
"This report provides an overview of federal whistleblower and anti-retaliation laws. In general, these laws protect employees who report misconduct by their employers or who engage in various protected activities, such as participating in an investigation or filing a complaint. In recent years, Congress has expanded employee protections for a variety of private-sector workers. Eleven of the forty laws reviewed in this report were enacted after 1999. Among these laws are the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act, and the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. The report focuses on key aspects of the federal whistleblower and anti-retaliation laws. For each law, the report summarizes the activities that are protected, how the law's protections are enforced, whether the law provides a private right of action, the remedies prescribed by the law, and the year the law's whistleblower or anti-retaliation provisions were adopted and amended. With regard to amendment dates, the report identifies only dates associated with substantive amendments. For enactments after 2001, the report provides information on congressional sponsorship and votes."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Shimabukuro, Jon O.; Whitaker, L. Paige; Roberts, Emily E.
2013-04-22
-
Federal Government's Plenary Immigration Power Collides with the Constitutional Right to an Abortion (Part I) [November 27, 2017]
"This Sidebar is the first in a two-part series discussing Garza v. Hargan, a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit involving a detained unaccompanied alien minor and the right to terminate a pregnancy."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Smith, Hillel R.; Shimabukuro, Jon O.
2017-11-27
-
Federal Government's Plenary Immigration Power Collides with the Constitutional Right to an Abortion (Part II) [November 27, 2017]
This Sidebar is the second in a two-part series discussing the en banc decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (D.C. Circuit) in Garza v. Hargan, affirming a district court's order requiring the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to allow an unaccompanied alien minor in federal custody to have an abortion.
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Smith, Hillel R.; Shimabukuro, Jon O.
2017-11-27
-
Equal Rights Amendment: Close to Adoption? [July 2, 2018]
"Illinois' recent ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) to the U.S. Constitution has revived questions about the potential for the amendment to be adopted. First presented to the states in 1972, the ERA provides that '[e]quality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State on account of sex.' 37 states have now ratified the ERA, and some supporters of the amendment maintain that ratification by just one additional state could result in its adoption. After ratification by one more state, the ERA will have been ratified by three-fourths of the states, as required by Article V of the Constitution. Whether the ERA can be so adopted, however, is not entirely certain. Questions concerning the expiration of Congress's original ratification deadline without approval by three-fourths of the states, and the rescission of ratifications by five states between 1973 and 1978, would likely have to be addressed before the ERA would be formally adopted."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Shimabukuro, Jon O.
2018-07-02
-
Mandatory Arbitration and the Federal Arbitration Act [September 20, 2017]
"Under a growing number of consumer and employment agreements, companies are requiring disputes to be resolved through arbitration, a method of dispute resolution involving a neutral, private third party, rather than a judicial proceeding. In 2015, for example, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau found that tens of millions of consumers use consumer financial products that are subject to arbitration clauses. In nonunion workplaces, it is estimated that at least a quarter of all employees are now subject to mandatory arbitration agreements. While arbitration is often viewed as a faster and less expensive alternative to litigation, consumer advocates and others maintain that mandatory arbitration agreements create one-sided arrangements that deny consumers and employees advantages afforded by a judicial proceeding, such as the availability of a jury trial."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Shimabukuro, Jon O.; Staman, Jennifer
2017-09-20
-
Davis-Bacon Prevailing Wages and State Revolving Loan Programs Under the Clean Water Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act [November 20, 2013]
"The Davis-Bacon Act requires employers to pay workers on federal construction projects at least locally prevailing wages and fringe benefits. These wages and benefits are the minimum hourly wages and benefits that employers must pay workers. In order to hire and retain workers, employers may pay more than locally prevailing wages or benefits. Supporters of the Davis-Bacon Act maintain that it creates stability in local construction and labor markets and ensures that projects are built by the most skilled and experienced workers. Critics of the act argue that it impedes competition, raises construction costs, and imposes additional administrative requirements on contractors. The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, commonly called the Clean Water Act (CWA), authorizes appropriations to states to operate state revolving loan funds (SRFs) that finance the construction of wastewater treatment plants. The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) authorizes appropriations for SRFs to finance the construction of public drinking water systems. An issue for Congress is whether to apply Davis-Bacon prevailing wages to projects financed by the state revolving loan programs under the CWA and SDWA. […] The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) provided FY2009 supplemental appropriations funds to the CWA and SDWA SRFs, and required Davis-Bacon prevailing wages on projects funded in whole or in part by the act. Regular appropriations for EPA for FY2010 and FY2012 included provisions that applied Davis-Bacon prevailing wages to projects financed by the state revolving loan programs under both the CWA and SDWA."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Mayer, Gerald; Shimabukuro, Jon O.
2013-11-20
-
VA Accountability Act of 2015 (H.R. 1994), as Reported to the House [July 27, 2015]
"This report describes the VA Accountability Act of 2015 (H.R. 1994) as reported to the House by the Committee on Veterans Affairs on July 23, 2015, and compares it to current law where appropriate. A press account has reported that Chairman Jeff Miller may meet with all committee members to seek views of the minority before floor action. As a result of this meeting, it is possible that the final bill that will go to the House floor may have some provisions that differ from those that the Committee reported. This report provides a section-by-section description of the act: Section 1 is the short title, 'VA Accountability Act of 2015.' Section 2 would authorize the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to expedite removing or demoting most employees for misconduct. Section 3 would require an individual appointed (1) to a permanent position in the competitive service or (2) as a career appointee in the Senior Executive Service (SES) to serve an 18-month probationary period before the appointment would become final. Section 4 would establish a process for handling whistleblower complaints. Section 5 would establish specific requirements for VA's senior executive performance appraisal system and would require the Secretary of the VA to reassign senior executives to a new position at least every five years. It would also require a review of, and a plan for improvements to, the current management training program for senior executives. […] Section 10 would require the Comptroller General of the United States to conduct a study on the amount of time department employees spent in carrying out organizing activities related to labor organizations and the amount of space in department facilities used for such activities."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Nicola, Thomas J.; Carey, Maeve P.; Isaacs, Katelin P., 1980- . . .
2015-07-27
-
Homeland Security and Labor-Management Relations: NTEU v. Chertoff [Updated August 14, 2006]
"The Homeland Security Act of 2002 provides the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Director of the Office of Personnel Management ("OPM") with the authority to develop a separate human resources management system for the employees of the Department of Homeland Security ("DHS"). On February 1, 2005, final regulations to define and implement the new system were published in the Federal Register. Shortly after the regulations were issued, the National Treasury Employees Union ("NTEU") and several other labor organizations filed a lawsuit, alleging that DHS and OPM exceeded the authority granted to the agencies under the Homeland Security Act. On August 12, 2005, a U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia enjoined parts of the new regulations involving labor-management relations and the Merit Systems Protection Board in NTEU v. Chertoff. The district court on October 7, 2005, denied a motion by DHS and OPM to modify its injunction of labor-management relations regulations. On June 27, 2006, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit affirmed some conclusions of the district court, reversed others, and remanded the case to the district court for further proceedings consistent with its opinion. This report examines the opinions of the district court and court of appeals."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Shimabukuro, Jon O.; Nicola, Thomas J.
2006-08-14
-
Military Base Closures and Affected Defense Department Civil Service Employees [March 7, 2006]
"As a step in the 2005 round of the base realignment and closure (BRAC) process, the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission (commonly referred to as the BRAC Commission) recommended on September 8, 2005, that a number of domestic U.S. military installations be closed or realigned. Overall, the BRAC Commission estimated that the recommended closures or realignments would result in a net decrease of 15,874 federal civilian jobs at the Department of Defense (DOD). On September 15, 2005, the President approved the commission's recommendations and transmitted them to Congress. Congress rejected H.J.Res. 65 (a resolution of disapproval of the BRAC Commission recommendations) on October 27, 2005. The BRAC Commission recommendations took effect on November 9, 2005, and are required to be implemented by 2011. […] This report will be updated if major changes occur in the BRAC process regarding DOD civil service employees. Implementation of NSPS [National Security Personnel System] is discussed in CRS Report RL31954, 'DOD's National Security Personnel System: Statute, Regulations, and Implementation Plans', coordinated by Barbara Schwemle."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Brass, Clinton T.; Schwemle, Barbara L.; Shimabukuro, Jon O.
2006-03-07
-
Homeland Security: Final Regulations for the Department of Homeland Security Human Resources Management System (Subpart E) Compared With Current Law [Updated February 9, 2005]
"On February 1, 2005, final regulations to implement a new human resources management system for the Department of Homeland Security ("DHS") were published. The regulations provide for the organization of the new personnel system, describing, among other topics, the use of pay bands, how jobs will be evaluated, and how pay will be administered. In addition, subpart E of the final regulations defines the department's labor relations system. This report compares the provisions of the final regulations with similar provisions from title 5, chapter 71 of the U.S. Code. Although the collective bargaining rights for employees of DHS will be subject to the new regulations, such rights for most federal employees are otherwise governed by 5 U.S.C. chapter 71. While some of the differences involve simply a change in diction, other changes are more significant. The establishment of a Homeland Security Labor Relations Board that will perform many of the duties otherwise undertaken by the Federal Labor Relations Authority, as well as a redefining of what constitutes certain unfair labor practices are examples of these more noteworthy changes. The regulations take effect on March 3, 2005."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Shimabukuro, Jon O.
2005-02-09
-
Quarantine and Isolation: Selected Legal Issues Relating to Employment [Updated April 30, 2008]
"The emergence and rapid spread of a new avian influenza virus (H5N1) and its potential for causing a human influenza pandemic have given rise to issues relating to the use of quarantine and isolation. Questions relating to employment are among the most significant issues, since, if individuals fear losing their employment or their wages, compliance with public health measures such as isolation or quarantine may suffer. Although the common law doctrine of employment-at-will, which allows an employer to terminate an employee from employment for any reason other than those prohibited by statute, is generally applicable, there is an exception to this doctrine for public policy reasons. This report examines the employment-at-will doctrine, possible application of the public policy exception in the case of a potential influenza pandemic, the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), and possible application of the nondiscrimination mandates of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The report will be updated as developments warrant."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Jones, Nancy Lee; Shimabukuro, Jon O.
2008-04-30
-
Quarantine and Isolation: Selected Legal Issues Relating to Employment [Updated December 3, 2007]
"The emergence and rapid spread of a new avian influenza virus (H5N1) and its potential for causing a human influenza pandemic have given rise to issues relating to the use of quarantine and isolation. Questions relating to employment are among the most significant issues, since, if individuals fear losing their employment or their wages, compliance with public health measures such as isolation or quarantine may suffer. Although the common law doctrine of employment-at-will, which allows an employer to terminate an employee from employment for any reason other than those prohibited by statute, is generally applicable, there is an exception to this doctrine for public policy reasons. This report examines the employment-at-will doctrine, possible application of the public policy exception in the case of a potential influenza pandemic, the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), and possible application of the nondiscrimination mandates of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The report will be updated as developments warrant."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Shimabukuro, Jon O.; Jones, Nancy Lee
2007-12-03
-
Prevailing Wage Requirements and the Emergency Suspension of the Davis-Bacon Act [September 16, 2005]
"President Bush has, by proclamation, suspended the application of the Davis-Bacon Act to all contracts to be performed in the jurisdictions in Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, and Mississippi included in the Hurricane Katrina disaster area. This has the effect of permitting the payment of less than the locally prevailing wage on contracts entered into after September 8, 2005, for the construction or repair of public buildings and public works in the affected area. H.R. 3684 would make this type of suspension automatic for one year when a disaster is declared under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Shimabukuro, Jon O.; Luckey, John R.
2005-09-16
-
Quarantine and Isolation: Selected Legal Issues Relating to Employment [September 11, 2009]
"On June 11, in response to the global spread of a new strain of influenza, the World Health Organization (WHO) raised the level of influenza pandemic alert to phase 6, which indicates the start of an actual pandemic. This change reflects the spread of the new influenza A(H1N1) virus, not its severity. Although currently the pandemic is of moderate severity with the majority of patients experiencing mild symptoms and making a rapid and full recovery, this experience could change. Questions relating to employment are among the most significant issues raised by a pandemic since if individuals fear losing their employment or their wages, compliance with public health measures such as isolation or quarantine may suffer. Although the common law doctrine of employment-at-will, which allows an employer to terminate an employee from employment for any reason other than those prohibited by statute, is generally applicable, there is an exception to this doctrine for public policy reasons. This report will examine the employmentat- will doctrine, possible application of the public policy exception in the case of a potential influenza pandemic, the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), and possible application of the nondiscrimination mandates of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Shimabukuro, Jon O.; Jones, Nancy Lee
2009-09-11
-
Quarantine and Isolation: Selected Legal Issues Relating to Employment [May 11, 2009]
"Recent human cases of infection with a novel influenza A (H1N1) virus have been identified both internationally and in the United States. There has been human to human transmission and the new virus has the potential to become pandemic. The emergence of this virus, in addition to other potential pandemic threats such as the avian influenza A (H5N1) virus, has given rise to issues relating to the use of quarantine and isolation. Questions relating to employment are among the most significant issues since if individuals fear losing their employment or their wages, compliance with public health measures such as isolation or quarantine may suffer. Although the common law doctrine of employment-at-will, which allows an employer to terminate an employee from employment for any reason other than those prohibited by statute, is generally applicable, there is an exception to this doctrine for public policy reasons. This report will examine the employment-at-will doctrine, possible application of the public policy exception in the case of a potential influenza pandemic, the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), and possible application of the nondiscrimination mandates of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Shimabukuro, Jon O.; Jones, Nancy Lee
2009-05-11
-
Collective Bargaining and Homeland Security [Updated September 5, 2002]
"This report discusses the personnel provisions of recent proposals to create a new Department of Homeland Security. H.R. 5005, the Homeland Security Act of 2002, has generated concern among some members of the labor community who have questioned the possible denial of collective bargaining rights for the estimated 170,000 employees affected by the homeland defense reorganization. S. 2452, the National Homeland Security and Combating Terrorism Act of 2002, would restrict the President's ability under 5 U.S.C. § 7103(b)(1) to exclude the new Department and transferred agencies from coverage under chapter 71 of title 5, U.S. Code. The President's existing authority under 5 U.S.C. § 7103(b)(1) to exclude the employees of certain agencies from the ability to bargain collectively is also discussed in this report. The report provides a legislative history of this exclusion provision. In addition, the report reviews the concept of successorship, whereby a union may retain its status as the exclusive representative of employees acquired by a new employer. Successorship could be an issue for the eighteen unions that represent employees affected by the reorganization. This report reflects legislative action up through House passage of H.R. 5005. The report will be updated as events warrant."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Shimabukuro, Jon O.
2002-09-05
-
Collective Bargaining and Homeland Security [Updated November 18, 2002]
This report discusses the personnel provisions of H.R. 5710, the Homeland Security Act of 2002, and the President's existing authority under 5 U.S.C. 7103(b)(1) to exclude the employees of certain agencies from the ability to bargain collectively. H.R. 5710, described as a revised version of the original White House proposal to create a new Department of Homeland Security, was passed by the House on November 13, 2002. H.R. 5710 includes language related to the President's authority under 5 U.S.C. 7103(b)(1). The report provides a legislative history of 5 U.S.C. 7103(b)(1). In addition, the report reviews the concept of successorship, whereby a union may retain its status as the exclusive representative of employees acquired by a new employer. Successorship could be an issue for the eighteen unions that represent employees affected by the reorganization.
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Shimabukuro, Jon O.
2002-11-18
-
Quarantine and Isolation: Selected Legal Issues Relating to Employment [Updated November 1, 2008]
"This report examines the employment-at-will doctrine, possible application of the public policy exception in the case of a potential influenza pandemic, the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), and possible application of the nondiscrimination mandates of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The report will be updated as developments warrant. […] The emergence and rapid spread of a new avian influenza virus (H5N1) and its potential for causing a human influenza pandemic have given rise to issues relating to the use of quarantine and isolation. Questions relating to employment are among the most significant issues, since, if individuals fear losing their employment or their wages, compliance with public health measures such as isolation or quarantine may suffer. Although the common law doctrine of employment-at-will, which allows an employer to terminate an employee from employment for any reason other than those prohibited by statute, is generally applicable, there is an exception to this doctrine for public policy reasons."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Shimabukuro, Jon O.; Jones, Nancy Lee
2008-11-01
-
Definition of 'Supervisor' Under the National Labor Relations Act [July 5, 2012]
"The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) establishes certain protections for private sector employees who want to form or join a labor union. These protections do not extend to supervisors. Historically, Congress has debated where to draw the line between employees who have different levels of management responsibility. It is generally agreed that employees who have significant supervisory duties, such as hiring and firing, are supervisors. However, disagreement occurs with respect to employees who have minor supervisory duties. In 2001, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the test administered by the National Labor Relations Board ('NLRB' or the 'Board') to determine whether an employee is a supervisor was inconsistent with the NLRA. In response to 'NLRB v. Kentucky River Community Care, Inc.,' the Board issued a September 2006 decision in 'Oakwood Healthcare, Inc.' in which it established new definitions for three key terms that are used to identify supervisors for purposes of the NLRA: to 'assign' and 'responsibly to direct' employees and to exercise 'independent judgment.'"
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Mayer, Gerald; Shimabukuro, Jon O.
2012-07-05
-
National Labor Relations Act: Background and Selected Topics [September 7, 2012]
"The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA or 'the Act') recognizes the right of employees to engage in collective bargaining through representatives of their own choosing. By 'encouraging the practice and procedure of collective bargaining,' the Act attempts to mitigate and eliminate labor-related obstructions to the free flow of commerce. Although union membership has declined dramatically since the 1950s, congressional interest in the NLRA remains significant. In the 112th Congress, over 30 bills have been introduced to amend the NLRA. Some of these bills address the timing of union representation elections, while others are concerned with varying aspects of the NLRA, such as the activities of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), which implements and administers the Act. Since the NLRA's enactment in 1935, the NLRB and the courts have considered a variety of issues arising under the Act. This report reviews selected decisions of the NLRB and the courts on three of them."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Shimabukuro, Jon O.
2012-09-07
-
Whistleblower Protections Under Federal Law: An Overview [September 13, 2012]
"Legal protections for employees who report illegal misconduct by their employers have increased dramatically since the late 1970s when such protections were first adopted for federal employees in the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978. Since that time, with the enactment of the Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989, Congress has expanded such protections for federal employees. Congress has also established whistleblower protections for individuals in certain private-sector employment through the adoption of whistleblower provisions in at least 18 federal statutes. Among these statutes is the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act, and the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act). […] This report provides an overview of key aspects of the 18 selected federal statutes applicable to individuals in certain private-sector industries. It focuses on the protections provided to employees who believe they have been subject to retaliation, rather than on how or where alleged misconduct should be disclosed. In addition, the report also includes an overview of the Whistleblower Protection Act. While state law may also provide whistleblower protections for employees, this report focuses only on the aforementioned federal statutory provisions."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Shimabukuro, Jon O.; Whitaker, L. Paige
2012-09-13
