We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Jason C. Kim Neal Gerber & Eisenberg LLP

Results 1 to 5 of 5



California Supreme Court rules on employer’s meal break requirements *

- April 23 2012
An employer's obligation to provide meal breaks has become a contentious issue and a popular area for class action lawsuits in the past few years.


NRLB orders new decertification election due to unlawful rules in employee handbook *

- May 17 2011
An employee handbook is an important tool for employers to set forth their rules and expectations of employees and to ensure compliance with labor laws.


The wage and hour nightmare continues: plaintiffs in the Seventh Circuit can now combine FLSA collective action with Rule 23 class action *

- January 31 2011
In this day and age, when wage and hour lawsuits are arguably the single greatest threat to employers and businesses across the country, employees planning to file multi-plaintiff wage and hour claims in the Seventh Circuit have reason to celebrate.

Co-authors: William J. Tarnow II.


Labor board proposes rule to require posting of employee rights under the National Labor Relations Act *

- December 22 2010
On December 21, 2010, the NLRB submitted to the Federal Register a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, which will be published on December 22, 2010, that will require all private sector employers covered by the National Labor Relations Act ("NLRA") to notify employees of their rights under the NLRA in the form of a notice posting.


Illinois Supreme Court expands strict liability standard for sexual harassment by supervisors *

- May 7 2009
In a significant ruling interpreting the Illinois Human Rights Act, the Illinois Supreme Court recently expanded employers’ potential exposure to sexual harassment claims and damages by holding that an employer is strictly liable for sexual harassment committed by a supervisor, even if the supervisor does not directly supervise the employee who is harassed.

Co-authors: Chad Moeller.