Labor & Employment Law Update for Business Owners, HR & In-House Counsel | Amundsen Davis Attorneys: Amundsen Davis

Can Employers Restrict Union Pins and Shirts? Lessons From the Starbucks Decision

Elizabeth S. Cortez — Thu, 03 Sep 2026 09:00:01 -0400

Employers may have more flexibility to enforce neutral dress code and uniform policies, even when those policies affect employees' display of union insignia. On September 2, 2026, in a decision involving Starbucks’ New York Reserve Roastery, the Second Circuit rejected the NLRB’s stringent standard to workplace rules that restricts employees’ ability to display union insignia under its Tesla decision. The court concluded that the Board’s Tesla standard did not adequately balance employees’ rights with an employer’s legitimate business interests.

For employers, this is a significant development, but not a nationwide green light to restrict union apparel. While the decision does not eliminate employees’ rights to display union messages or overrule Tesla nationwide, it signals growing judicial skepticism of the Board’s restrictive approach.

NLRB Successor Bar Under Fire: What Employers Buying Unionized Businesses Need to Know

Laura M. Leahy — Wed, 02 Sep 2026 09:00:02 -0400

Employers acquiring a business with a unionized workforce may soon have more flexibility to challenge the incumbent union's status than they have had for decades. On July 21, the D.C. Circuit held in Hospital Menonita de Guayama, Inc. v. NLRB that the National Relations Labor Board (NLRB ) never had the authority to impose its “successor bar” doctrine, a rule that generally requires a successor employer to continue bargaining with an existing union for up to a year after an acquisition. As one of the first appellate decisions to reject an NLRB doctrine since the U.S. Supreme Court ended automatic deference to federal agencies, other doctrines built on similarly thin statutory footing may be next.

Illinois Employers Must Provide Paid Jury Duty Leave Beginning January 1, 2027

Aaron J. Graf — Mon, 31 Aug 2026 09:00:03 -0400

Effective January 1, 2027, Illinois employers with 26 or more employees must pay employees at their regular hourly rate for their existing job-protected jury duty leave. The change, enacted through House Bill 4844 and signed by Governor J.B. Pritzker on July 31, 2026, amends the Illinois Jury Act and Illinois Jury Commission Act. Crucially, there are no caps or limitations on the new paid leave.

While Illinois employers have long been required to provide employees with protected time away from work to fulfill jury duty obligations, the new law fundamentally changes who bears the financial burden of that leave. Illinois has chosen to place responsibility for additional pay above the low jury duty stipend on private employers. As a result, what was previously an operational challenge of covering for an employee's absence will now also become a potentially significant payroll expense.

Inside the NLRB: That Employee Group Text Could Create NLRA Liability for Nonunion Employers

Elizabeth S. Cortez — Thu, 27 Aug 2026 09:00:04 -0400

Many nonunion employers do not expect that they may be one ordinary employee group chat away from a potential National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) issue. The common misconception is that labor law only matters when a union is involved. It doesn’t. As a result, disciplinary decisions that seem routine can quickly become unfair labor practice charges if managers fail to recognize when employees are engaging in protected concerted activity.

What Employers Should Know About Workers' Compensation Mental Health Claims After the Fifth Circuit's Exxon Decision

Matthew G. Gorski — Tue, 25 Aug 2026 09:00:05 -0400

A recent decision made by the U.S. Court of Appeals in the Fifth Circuit found that OSHA lacked congressional authorization to regulate mental health in the workplace. While the decision does not change workers' compensation laws or standards for mental injury claims, it raises important questions for employers about how workplace mental health conditions may be evaluated under existing legal frameworks.

Fifth Circuit Vacates OSHA Mental Health Recordkeeping Rule and Signals Closer Scrutiny of OSHA Authority

Matthew Horn — Thu, 20 Aug 2026 09:00:06 -0400

The Fifth Circuit recently issued a decision that could affect how courts evaluate Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations and enforcement actions moving forward.

On July 21, 2026, in Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission, the court addressed OSHA’s rule requiring employers to record certain work-related mental illnesses. It concluded that OSHA exceeded its Congress authority under the Occupational Safety and Health Act and vacated the rule, Exxon’s citation, and the accompanying penalty.

Pay Transparency 2.0: Key Employer Takeaways on the Shift in Pay Transparency Compliance

Milt Castro — Tue, 18 Aug 2026 09:00:07 -0400

Compliance with pay transparency laws is no longer as simple as adding a salary range to a job posting and moving on. As state pay transparency requirements and compliance obligations continue to expand nationwide, regulators are increasingly focused on whether employers’ disclosures are meaningful, accurate, and supported by actual compensation practices. As lawmakers and regulators continue to refine pay transparency requirements, employers should view compliance as part of a broader compensation strategy rather than a standalone posting obligation.

DOL Clarifies When Travel Time Is Compensable Under the FLSA for Hybrid and Field-Based Employees

Rachel L. Grajewski, Peter E. Hansen — Wed, 12 Aug 2026 09:00:08 -0400

The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) recently issued much-needed guidance on compensable travel time, one of the more complex areas of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Laid out in two opinion letters, the guidance is particularly relevant for employers with hybrid workforces and field-based employees. Employers should review their pay practices to ensure they are properly distinguishing between ordinary commuting and compensable work activities.

New Colorado Law Restricts Employers From Retaining Employee ID Documents Under HB 26-1283

Sara Zorich — Mon, 10 Aug 2026 09:00:09 -0400

Colorado employers face new compliance obligations under HB 26-1283, a law that sharply limits when they may demand, keep, or control an employee's or applicant's government-issued ID. With the new law carrying criminal and civil exposure for violations, employers should review onboarding practices now.

New Illinois Law Expands Attorney General Powers to Investigate Employers

John R. Hayes — Wed, 05 Aug 2026 09:00:10 -0400

On July 31, 2026, Governor Pritzker signed new legislation greatly expanding the already-broad investigatory powers of the Workplace Rights Bureau in the Attorney General’s Office (“OAG”). Effective January 1, 2027, the law authorizes the OAG to investigate supposed violations of Illinois employment law and creates penalties for employers that do not comply. In essence this signals yet another move by Illinois to dispense with the fundamental due process rights of employers.