| Title | Resource Type | Date | |
| Practice Note: Overview | |||
| 1 | Affirmative Action: Overview A Note outlining the federal affirmative action laws pertaining to federal contractors and subcontractors: Executive Order No. 11246; Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973; and the Vietnam Era Veterans' Readjustment Act of 1974. The three laws ensure that federal contractors and subcontractors recruit and advance in employment qualified minorities, women, persons with disabilities, and covered veterans. The Note does not address relevant state or local law. State and local statutes and regulations may impose additional requirements on employers that contract with, or receive funding from, states and local governments. However, the information contained in this resource will be useful and relevant to employers in every state. | Practice Note: Overview | Maintained |
| 2 | Business Immigration Sponsorship: Overview This Note presents business immigration fundamentals from an employer's perspective. It provides information on how employers can identify workers who need sponsorship, the basic processes required to sponsor foreign workers for immigration benefits and what employers should consider when planning to meet short- and long-term immigration goals for specific workers. | Practice Note: Overview | Maintained |
| 3 | Employee Benefits Law: Overview This Note provides an overview of the key issues and laws that apply to employee benefit plans, including the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA). It explains the types of employee benefits that employers can provide, how and when the IRC and ERISA apply and addresses other federal laws that apply to employee benefits. | Practice Note: Overview | Maintained |
| 4 | Employee Handbook Toolkit Resources to help employers create, maintain and distribute employee handbooks. | Practice Note: Overview | Maintained |
| 5 | Employee Hiring and Orientation Toolkit Resources to assist an employer in recruiting, interviewing and hiring employees. | Practice Note: Overview | Maintained |
| 6 | Hiring and Employing Foreign Nationals in the US: Overview This Note addresses immigration concepts for the employment of foreign nationals in the US. The Note provides information on the US immigration system and an overview of nonimmigrant and immigrant visa classifications that may be used by employers. | Practice Note: Overview | Maintained |
| 7 | Human Resources Audit Toolkit Resources to assist an employer in conducting an audit of an employer's human resources practices. | Practice Note: Overview | Maintained |
| 8 | Immigration Compliance Toolkit Resources to help employers comply with legal requirements of employment eligibility verification and other immigration-related obligations. | Practice Note: Overview | Maintained |
| 9 | Joint Employment: Overview This Note provides an overview of joint employer relationships. It discusses the tests applied to determine whether a joint employer relationship exists under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) and the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). It also discusses the risks of being a joint employer and related best practices. It addresses federal law, but will be useful to employers in all states. | Practice Note: Overview | Maintained |
| 10 | Section 409A: Deferred Compensation Tax Rules: Overview This Note provides an overview of Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code which regulates the taxation of nonqualified deferred compensation plans. In addition to setting out Section 409A's basic requirements, this Note addresses various exemptions from Section 409A, including the short-term deferral exception and the severance pay exception. Other topics include: cross-border application of Section 409A, application to equity compensation awards, employer reporting and withholding requirements, penalties for noncompliance and methods of correcting Section 409A violations. | Practice Note: Overview | Maintained |
| 11 | State Law Issues Toolkit Resources providing overviews of state law on a variety of legal issues at a glance. | Practice Note: Overview | Maintained |
| 12 | Title I of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA ... This Note provides a very general overview of how and to what extent Title I of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) applies to certain employee benefit plans sponsored by private sector employers. It introduces several key concepts such as fiduciary duties, preemption and prohibited transactions. This Note also examines elements of ERISA's enforcement structure, including civil actions and penalties assessable by the Department of Labor. | Practice Note: Overview | Maintained |
| 13 | Employer Access to Social Media Accounts State Laws ... A Chart describing state legislation prohibiting private employers from asking employees and job applicants to provide access to their social media accounts and reveal usernames and passwords, with certain exceptions. | Practice Note: Overview | 03-Jun-2013 |
| 14 | State Right-to-work Laws: Overview A Chart listing the states with right-to-work laws. Right-to-work laws generally limit an employer and union's ability to negotiate for union security clauses in collective bargaining agreements (CBA) that require union membership or union dues or fees payments as a condition of maintaining employment. This Chart lists the states with right-to-work provisions in their constitutions and right-to-work statutes. This chart covers private employers outside of the railroad or airline industries. | Practice Note: Overview | 31-Jan-2013 |
| 15 | State E-Verify Employment Eligibility Verification Laws ... A Chart listing the states with employment eligibility verification and immigration enforcement laws. This Chart is limited to states that have passed laws requiring all or some employers, private or public, to conduct verification of newly hired employees. It outlines which states require each type of employer to conduct verification and whether the state requires use of E-Verify or allows for an alternative form of verification. | Practice Note: Overview | 31-Oct-2012 |
| Practice Notes | |||
| 1 | Applying Section 409A to Severance Benefits This Note explains the application of Internal Revenue Code Section 409A, relating to nonqualified deferred compensation plans, to various types of severance benefits. While some severance payments may be exempt from Section 409A because they qualify as short-term deferrals or fall under another exception explained in the Note, Section 409A needs to be considered and addressed whenever severance is being offered to ensure that it is structured in a manner that does not violate Section 409A. | Practice Notes | Maintained |
| 2 | Background Checks and References A Note addressing background checks and obtaining references on applicants for employment or current employees, including the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) and the use of third-party providers, FCRA violations, and best practices and legal rights for employers. For information on state law, see the State Q&A Tool under Related Content to the right. | Practice Notes | Maintained |
| 3 | Demonstrating the Right to Work in the United States A Note discussing employers' legal obligations under IRCA to document employees' eligibility to work in the US and prohibitions against hiring, recruiting or referring (for a fee) employees who are not authorized to work in the US. The note highlights best practices for Form I-9 processing and addresses how employers can handle Social Security no-match letters and increased immigration enforcement. | Practice Notes | Maintained |
| 4 | Drafting an Employment Eligibility Verification Compliance ... This Note describes provisions employers should consider in drafting an employment eligibility verification compliance policy. It covers the primary topic areas employers should think about before finalizing a policy, including how to complete and maintain Forms I-9, E-Verify, Social Security no-match and immigration sponsorship. | Practice Notes | Maintained |
| 5 | E-Verify for Employers: Best Practices A Note discussing employer enrollment and participation in E-Verify as part of the IRCA I-9 employment eligibility verification process. This Note also provides best practices for employers considering E-Verify participation. This Note addresses federal law. | Practice Notes | Maintained |
| 6 | Employee Handbooks: Best Practices This Note describes best practices for creating, distributing and maintaining an employee handbook. It discusses key reasons to create a handbook, drafting guidelines, considerations for employers that are creating a handbook from existing policies, tips for organizing a handbook, compliance with the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), distributing a handbook, employee acknowledgments and maintaining a handbook. This Note addresses federal law. For information on state law requirements, see the State Q&A Tools under Related Content to the right. | Practice Notes | Maintained |
| 7 | Employer Obligations under State Immigration Laws in the US A Note describing employer obligations under state immigration laws in the US. This Note outlines the basic parameters developed in state immigration laws and the steps employers should take to comply with these laws. | Practice Notes | Maintained |
| 8 | Negligent Hiring, Retention and Supervision A Note summarizing the elements of negligent hiring, retention and supervision claims, which are governed by state law. This Note also covers the potential defenses and suggests steps a private employer can take to minimize liability. For more information on state law regarding negligent hiring, retention and supervision, see the State Q&A Tool under Related Content to the right. | Practice Notes | Maintained |
| 9 | Non-compete Agreements with Employees This Note provides an overview of non-compete agreements between employers and employees. Non-compete agreements are largely dependent on state law. This Note contains information that is general and not jurisdiction-specific. For information on state law requirements, see the State Q&A Tools under Related Content to the right. | Practice Notes | Maintained |
| 10 | Protection of Employers' Trade Secrets and Confidential ... This Note describes trade secrets and confidential information protections available to employers. It examines trade secret definitions and legal recourse, including misappropriation, tortious interference and breach of duty of loyalty and/or fiduciary duty claims. It also explores relevant restrictive covenants and best practices. This Note provides a general overview of federal law in this area. For information on state law, see the State Law Q&A Tools under Related Content to the right. | Practice Notes | Maintained |
| 11 | Recruiting and Interviewing: Minimizing Legal Risk A Note describing legal risks in recruiting and interviewing and how to minimize them. This Note addresses federal law and jurisdiction-neutral considerations. For information on state law requirements, see the State Q&A Tools under Related Content to the right. | Practice Notes | Maintained |
| 12 | The H-1B Nonimmigrant Visa Classification A Note about the H-1B nonimmigrant visa classification, used by employers to sponsor foreign nationals to work in the US. This Note describes how a foreign worker can qualify for H-1B classification, how an employer obtains a Labor Condition Application (LCA), the H-1B petition process and how the foreign worker acquires lawful H-1B status. | Practice Notes | Maintained |
| 13 | The Trade NAFTA (TN) Nonimmigrant Visa Classification A Note about the Trade NAFTA (TN) nonimmigrant visa classification, used by employers to sponsor foreign nationals who are citizens of Canada or Mexico to work in the US. This Note describes how a foreign worker can qualify for the TN classification, the TN petition process and how the foreign worker acquires lawful TN status. | Practice Notes | Maintained |
| 14 | US Immigration Sponsorship and Third-party Worksites A Practice Note describing the issues in third-party worksite placement for H-1B or L-1B workers. This Note provides tips for employers and presents the legal requirements for employers to sponsor H-1B or L-1B workers that will work at third-party worksites. | Practice Notes | Maintained |
| Standard Documents | |||
| 1 | Application for Employment An employment application to be provided to candidates interested in employment with an organization. This Standard Document is based on federal law. For information on state law requirements, see the State Q&A Tool under Related Content to the right. To customize the background checks section for a particular state, see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 2 | Background Check Policy An employee background check policy. This policy can be incorporated into an employee handbook or used as a stand-alone policy document. This Standard Document applies only to private workplaces. It is jurisdiction neutral. State or local law may impose additional or different requirements but this document will be useful and relevant to employers in every state. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 3 | Employee Confidentiality and Proprietary Rights Agreement An agreement between an employer and an employee concerning confidentiality and appropriate handling of the employer's commercially valuable information, compliance with relevant security rules and policies, and protection of the employer's intellectual property assets. Agreements of this type have various titles, which may use the term "non-disclosure" in place of "confidentiality," or "intellectual property" in place of "proprietary rights." This Standard Document is drafted in favor of the employer. It is based on federal law. For information on state law requirements, see the State Q&A Tools under Related Content to the right. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 4 | Employee Confidentiality and Proprietary Rights Agreement ... A California-specific agreement between an employer and an employee concerning confidentiality and appropriate handling of the employer's commercially valuable information, compliance with relevant security rules and policies, and protection of the employer's intellectual property assets. Agreements of this type have various titles, which may use the term "non-disclosure" in place of "confidentiality," or "intellectual property" in place of "proprietary rights." This Standard Document is drafted in favor of the employer. It is based on California law. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 5 | Employee Non-compete Agreement An agreement between an employer and an employee limiting an employee's competitive activities for a specified period of time after the employment relationship ends. This Standard Document is drafted in favor of the employer. It is jurisdiction neutral. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. For information on state law requirements regarding non-competes and trade secret laws, see the State Q&A Tools under Related Content to the right. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 6 | Employee Referral Policy A policy for employers that reward employees for referring qualified candidates for open job postings. This policy can be incorporated into an employee handbook or used as a stand-alone policy document. This Standard Document applies only to private workplaces. It is jurisdiction neutral. State or local law may impose additional or different requirements but this document will be useful and relevant to employers in every state. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 7 | Employee Relocation Expenses Agreement A model relocation expenses agreement for a private employer to use when providing relocation assistance to an employee. This relocation expenses agreement is based on federal law. It has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 8 | Employee Retention Bonus Agreement A model retention agreement, sometimes referred to as a stay bonus agreement, for a private employer to use when offering an employee a retention bonus for remaining with the employer until a specified date. This retention bonus agreement is based on federal law. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 9 | Executive Employment Agreement An agreement specifying the terms and conditions of an executive's employment to be executed by both the employer and the executive. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. It is based on federal law. For information on state law requirements, see the State Q&A Tools under Related Content to the right. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 10 | Executive Employment Agreement Term Sheet A model term sheet for employers to use when negotiating an executive employment agreement. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 11 | Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) Adverse Action Notification ... A letter to be sent to job applicants not selected for a position because of information contained in their consumer report, as required under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). This includes integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips, including a discussion on notification requirements and potential penalties. This Standard Document is based on federal law. State and local law may impose additional or different requirements, but this document will be useful and relevant to employers in every state. For more information on state law, see the State Q&A Tools under Related Content to the right. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 12 | Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) Disclosure and Authorization ... Background check consent form serving as a disclosure and authorization for an employer to provide to job applicants and employees before seeking a consumer report for employment purposes, as required under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). This resource includes integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips, including a discussion on disclosure and authorization requirements. The disclosure and authorization are based on federal law. State and local law may impose additional or different requirements, but this document will be useful and relevant to employers in every state. For more information on state law, see the State Q&A Tools under Related Content to the right. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 13 | Form I-9 Agent Instructions for Remote Employees A Standard Document for employers to use to provide instructions to remote employees and agents for the proper completion of the employment eligibility verfication Form I-9 Sections 1, 2 or 3 for the employer's remote employees. This Standard Document is based on federal law. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 14 | Guidelines for Using Background Checks in Employment Guidelines for hiring managers and human resources staff on using background checks in employment, including compliance with the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act requirements. These guidelines incorporate updated guidance from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) on the use of criminal background check information. This Standard Document applies only to private workplaces. State or local law may impose additional or different requirements but this document will be useful and relevant to employers in every state. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 15 | H-1B Petition Support Letter A sample H-1B petition support letter. This letter is used by employers to support H-1B nonimmigrant visa petitions to the US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 16 | Invitation Letter for a Temporary Business Visitor A template invitation letter for US companies to use for foreign business visitors. This letter may be addressed to either a US embassy or consulate (in support of a visa application) or US Customs and Border Protection immigration inspections (in support of an admission request). This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 17 | Nepotism Policy An employee policy on nepotism (sometimes referred to as anti-nepotism) for private employees. It can be incorporated into an employee handbook or used as a stand-alone policy document. This Standard Document applies only to private workplaces. It is jurisdiction neutral. State or local law may impose additional or different obligations but this document will be useful and relevant to employers in every state. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 18 | Offer Letter for a Commission Salesperson An offer letter to be used with an employee paid on commission, such as a salesperson or sales representative. This offer letter also can be used as a short-form employment agreement. This Standard Document is intended to be used by private employers with their nonunionized workforce. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. It is based on federal law. For information on state law requirements, see the State Q&A Tools under Related Content to the right. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 19 | Offer Letter for a Fluctuating Workweek Employee An offer letter to be used with an employee paid on a fluctuating workweek basis. This offer letter also can be used as a short-form employment agreement. This Standard Document is intended to be used by private employers with their nonunionized workforce. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. It is based on federal law. For information on state law requirements, see the State Q&A Tool under Related Content to the right. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 20 | Offer Letter/Employment Agreement for a Non-Executive ... A short-form offer letter/employment agreement containing terms and conditions of employment for a non-executive employee to be executed by both the employer and employee. This Standard Document is intended to be used by private employers with their non-unionized workforce. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanatory and drafting tips. It is based on federal law. For information on state law requirements, see the State Q&A Tool under Related Content to the right. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 21 | Offer Letter/Short-form Employment Agreement (California) A California-specific offer letter/short-form employment agreement for a non-executive specifying the terms and conditions of employment to be acknowledged and signed by the employee. It includes provisions addressing at-will, background check and credit report requirements and new pay notice requirements. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanatory and drafting tips. It is based on California law. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 22 | Rejection Letter A rejection letter to be provided to job applicants not selected for interviews and candidates who are not hired for a position. This Standard Document includes an integrated note with important explanations and drafting tips, including a discussion of certain recordkeeping requirements under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA). | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| 23 | TN Petition or Application Support Letter A sample Trade-NAFTA (TN) petition or application support letter. This letter is used by employers to support TN nonimmigrant visa petitions to the US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) or applications to a US consular official in Mexico or an immigration inspector at a port of entry. This Standard Document has integrated notes with important explanations and drafting tips. | Standard Documents | Maintained |
| Standard Clauses | |||
| 1 | Model Section 409A Employment Agreement Provisions These Standard Clauses set out provisions commonly included in executive employment agreements to ensure that payments comply with Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code or are structured to fit within one of Section 409A's exceptions. Common exceptions include the short-term deferral exception and the separation pay exception. These Standard Clauses have integrated drafting notes with important explanations and drafting tips. | Standard Clauses | Maintained |
| Checklists | |||
| 1 | Avoiding Discriminatory Questions in Interviews Checklist A Checklist of questions that should be avoided in employment interviews, as well as a list of questions that may be asked about a candidate's potential or apparent disability. This Checklist is based on federal law, including Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), as amended by the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act (ADAAA). For information on state law requirements, see the State Q&A Tools under Related Content to the right. | Checklists | Maintained |
| 2 | Conducting Effective Interviews Checklist A Checklist with best practices for effective employment interviews, including steps to minimize legal risk before, during and after interviews. This Checklist provides best practices under federal law primarily. For information on state law requirements, see the State Q&A Tools under Related Content to the right. | Checklists | Maintained |
| 3 | Drafting an Employee Confidentiality Agreement: Best ... A Checklist outlining best practices for employers drafting employee confidentiality agreements, sometimes referred to as confidentiality and proprietary rights agreements. This Checklist is jurisdiction neutral. | Checklists | Maintained |
| 4 | Drafting an Employee Non-compete Agreement: Best ... A Checklist outlining best practices for employers drafting non-compete agreements with employees. This Checklist is jurisdiction neutral. For information on state law requirements regarding non-compete agreements, see State Q&A Tool under Related Content to the right. | Checklists | Maintained |
| 5 | E-Verify Critical Timeframes Chart A Chart of critical timeframes for employers that use E-Verify. This Chart provides the timeframes that are required for all employers enrolled in E-Verify, and includes specific guidelines for federal contractors. | Checklists | Maintained |
| 6 | Employee Drug and Alcohol Testing under the Americans with ... A Checklist of issues to consider under the Americans with Disabilities Act when testing applicants or employees for drug and alcohol use and disciplining employees for that use. This Checklist addresses federal law. For information on state law requirements, see the State Q&A Tool under Related Content to the right. | Checklists | Maintained |
| 7 | Employer, Employee and Government Actions in the I-9 and E ... A Chart describing the major actions and required timeframes for action in the Form I-9 and E-Verify processes. The Form I-9 is required for all employers under The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, and E-Verify is mandatory for some employers and voluntary for others. | Checklists | Maintained |
| 8 | H-1B Petition Intake, Preparation and Filing Checklist A Checklist to assist employers processing H-1B petitions for employees and applicants. This resource lists the issues that employers should consider, the questions they should ask and the documents and information they should gather when preparing and filing an H-1B petition. | Checklists | Maintained |
| 9 | Hiring Foreign Nationals in the US Checklist A Checklist of key issues for employers to consider when hiring foreign national workers requiring immigration sponsorship. This Checklist helps employers identify the information and documents they need to strategize and prepare immigration sponsorship. | Checklists | Maintained |
| 10 | Labor Condition Application (LCA) Compliance Checklist A Checklist of key issues to help employers comply with Labor Condition Application (LCA) obligations. Employers must obtain LCAs to sponsor workers for H-1B nonimmigrant visa status. To obtain an LCA certification, employers must make attestations about wages and working conditions for foreign and US workers, and must maintain a Public Access File (PAF). | Checklists | Maintained |
| 11 | Medical Examinations and Inquiries in Employment Checklist A Checklist about conducting medical tests on applicants or employees. This Checklist outlines issues employers should consider before conducting medical tests. This Checklist addresses federal law. For information on state law requirements for drug testing laws, see the State Q&A Tool under Related Content to the right. | Checklists | Maintained |
| 12 | TN Petition or Application Intake, Preparation and Filing ... A Checklist to assist employers processing Trade NAFTA (TN) petitions or applications for employees and applicants. This resource lists the issues that employers should consider, the questions they should ask and the documents and information they should gather when preparing and filing a TN petition or application. | Checklists | Maintained |
| 13 | Terms of an Executive Employment Agreement Checklist This Checklist outlines the provisions that employers and practitioners should consider when negotiating the terms of an executive employment agreement, such as forms of compensation, severance payments and benefits and restrictive covenants. It also sets out relevant design considerations. | Checklists | Maintained |
| 14 | Trade Secrets and Confidential Information Best Practices at ... A Checklist outlining steps employers can take at the beginning of the employment relationship to avoid potential claims from former employers for theft of trade secrets and unfair competition, and to protect the new employer's confidential, proprietary and trade secret information. | Checklists | Maintained |
| 15 | Using Background Checks in Employment Checklist A Checklist discussing considerations for private employers when using background checks in employment, including compliance with the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act requirements. This Checklist does not cover the special requirements for commercial drivers or background checks initiated by employment agencies or headhunters. For information about state law governing background checks, see the State Q&A Tool under Related Content to the right. | Checklists | Maintained |
| State Q&A Tool | |||
| 1 | Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool This tool enables subscribers to search and compare PLC's Background Check Laws State Q&A resources. Questions and answers cover state statutes equivalent to the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), criminal/non-criminal background check considerations, authorized/unauthorized inquiries, employer liability, rules regarding employment references and more. Simply select the questions and the jurisdictions that you are interested in and click the "Submit" button. To see all of PLC's State Q&As on Background Check Laws, see State Q&A Guide to Background Check Laws. To see all of PLC's State Q&As, including relevant Legal Updates since the publication date (under Related Content), see individual Q&As on the Labor & Employment State Q&As landing page. | State Q&A Tool | -- |
| 2 | Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool This tool enables subscribers to search and compare PLC's Drug Testing Laws State Q&A resources. Questions and answers cover state-specific drug testing requirements, circumstances under which drug testing is permitted, the kinds of tests authorized by law, substances for which employers can test, protocols, employer liability, legal protections for employees and more. Simply select the questions and the jurisdictions that you are interested in and click the "Submit" button. To see all of PLC's State Q&As on Drug Testing Laws, see State Q&A Guide to Drug Testing Laws. To see all of PLC's State Q&As, including relevant Legal Updates since the publication date (under Related Content), see individual Q&As on the Labor & Employment State Q&As landing page. | State Q&A Tool | -- |
| 3 | Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool This tool enables subscribers to search and compare PLC's Hiring Requirements State Q&A resources. Questions and answers address state-specific required disclosures to new hires, the way in which notice should be provided, employment applications, relevant state agencies and more. Simply select the questions and the jurisdictions that you are interested in and click the "Submit" button. To see all of PLC's State Q&As on Hiring Requirements, see State Q&A Guide to Hiring Requirements. To see all of PLC's State Q&As, including relevant Legal Updates since the publication date (under Related Content), see individual Q&As on the Labor & Employment State Q&As landing page. | State Q&A Tool | -- |
| 4 | Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool This tool enables subscribers to search and compare PLC's Non-compete Laws State Q&A resources. Questions and answers address state-specific issues of enforcement, drafting, choice of law, reasonableness of restrictions, remedies and more. Simply select the questions and the jurisdictions that you are interested in and click the "Submit" button. To see all of PLC's State Q&As on Non-compete Laws, see State Q&A Guide to Non-compete Laws. To see all of PLC's State Q&As, including relevant Legal Updates since the publication date (under Related Content), see individual Q&As on the Labor & Employment State Q&As landing page. | State Q&A Tool | -- |
| 5 | Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool This tool enables subscribers to search and compare PLC's Trade Secret Law State Q&A resources. Questions and answers cover state-specific definitions of trade secrets, reasonable efforts to maintain secrecy, misappropriation, defenses, remedies and more. Simply select the questions and the jurisdictions that you are interested in and click the "Submit" button. To see all of PLC's State Q&As on Trade Secret Laws, see State Q&A Guide to Trade Secret Laws. To see all of PLC's State Q&As, including relevant Legal Updates since the publication date (under Related Content), see individual Q&As on the Labor & Employment State Q&As landing page. | State Q&A Tool | -- |
| State Q&A | |||
| 1 | Background Check Laws: Alabama A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in Alabama. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 26-Mar-2013 |
| 2 | Background Check Laws: Arizona A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in Arizona. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 28-Jan-2013 |
| 3 | Background Check Laws: Arkansas A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in Arkansas. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 17-Dec-2012 |
| 4 | Background Check Laws: California A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in California. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 04-Feb-2013 |
| 5 | Background Check Laws: Colorado A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in Colorado. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 28-Jun-2012 |
| 6 | Background Check Laws: Connecticut A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in Connecticut. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 21-Feb-2013 |
| 7 | Background Check Laws: District of Columbia A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in the District of Columbia. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 25-Feb-2013 |
| 8 | Background Check Laws: Florida A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in Florida. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 14-Feb-2013 |
| 9 | Background Check Laws: Georgia A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in Georgia. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 26-Dec-2012 |
| 10 | Background Check Laws: Idaho A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in Idaho. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 31-May-2013 |
| 11 | Background Check Laws: Illinois A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in Illinois. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 16-Jan-2013 |
| 12 | Background Check Laws: Indiana A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in Indiana. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 11-Apr-2012 |
| 13 | Background Check Laws: Iowa A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in Iowa. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 20-May-2013 |
| 14 | Background Check Laws: Kentucky A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in Kentucky. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 25-Mar-2013 |
| 15 | Background Check Laws: Louisiana A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in Louisiana. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 23-Apr-2013 |
| 16 | Background Check Laws: Maine A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in Maine. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 14-Nov-2012 |
| 17 | Background Check Laws: Maryland A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in Maryland. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 26-Jun-2012 |
| 18 | Background Check Laws: Massachusetts A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in Massachusetts. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 12-Feb-2013 |
| 19 | Background Check Laws: Michigan A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in Michigan. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 15-Aug-2012 |
| 20 | Background Check Laws: Minnesota A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in Minnesota. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). For an update on criminal history in employment applications, see Related Content on the right. | State Q&A | 20-Dec-2012 |
| 21 | Background Check Laws: Mississippi A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in Arkansas. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdcitions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 01-Feb-2013 |
| 22 | Background Check Laws: Missouri A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in Missouri. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 12-Jun-2012 |
| 23 | Background Check Laws: Nevada A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in Nevada. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 29-Nov-2012 |
| 24 | Background Check Laws: New Hampshire A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in New Hampshire. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 17-Dec-2012 |
| 25 | Background Check Laws: New Jersey A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in New Jersey. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 08-Nov-2012 |
| 26 | Background Check Laws: New Mexico A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in New Mexico. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 06-Mar-2013 |
| 27 | Background Check Laws: New York A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in New York. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 01-May-2013 |
| 28 | Background Check Laws: North Carolina A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in North Carolina. This Q&A addresses employer's obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 21-Dec-2012 |
| 29 | Background Check Laws: Ohio A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in Ohio. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 12-Dec-2012 |
| 30 | Background Check Laws: Oklahoma A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in Oklahoma. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 14-Mar-2013 |
| 31 | Background Check Laws: Oregon A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in Oregon. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to these questions can be compared across multiple jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 02-Aug-2012 |
| 32 | Background Check Laws: Pennsylvania A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in Pennsylvania. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 05-Nov-2012 |
| 33 | Background Check Laws: South Carolina A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in South Carolina. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 28-Mar-2013 |
| 34 | Background Check Laws: Tennessee A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in Tennessee. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 02-Apr-2013 |
| 35 | Background Check Laws: Texas A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in Texas. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 28-Mar-2013 |
| 36 | Background Check Laws: Utah A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in Utah. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 24-Apr-2013 |
| 37 | Background Check Laws: Vermont A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in Vermont. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 12-Jun-2013 |
| 38 | Background Check Laws: Virginia A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in Virginia. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 05-Jul-2012 |
| 39 | Background Check Laws: Washington A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in Washington. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 05-Jul-2012 |
| 40 | Background Check Laws: West Virginia A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in West Virginia. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 14-Mar-2013 |
| 41 | Background Check Laws: Wisconsin A Q&A guide to background check and employment reference law for private employers in Wisconsin. This Q&A addresses employers' obligations when conducting criminal and non-criminal background checks and penalties for violating these laws. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Background Check Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 30-Nov-2012 |
| 42 | Drug Testing Laws: Alabama A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Alabama. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 23-Jan-2013 |
| 43 | Drug Testing Laws: Arizona A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Arizona. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 05-Nov-2012 |
| 44 | Drug Testing Laws: California A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in California. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 05-Sep-2012 |
| 45 | Drug Testing Laws: Colorado A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Colorado. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 01-May-2013 |
| 46 | Drug Testing Laws: Connecticut A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Connecticut. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 31-May-2013 |
| 47 | Drug Testing Laws: District of Columbia A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in the District of Columbia. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 29-Mar-2013 |
| 48 | Drug Testing Laws: Florida A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Florida. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 02-Oct-2012 |
| 49 | Drug Testing Laws: Georgia A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Georgia. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 29-Mar-2013 |
| 50 | Drug Testing Laws: Idaho A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Idaho. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 12-Jul-2012 |
| 51 | Drug Testing Laws: Illinois A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Illinois. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 25-Feb-2013 |
| 52 | Drug Testing Laws: Indiana A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Indiana. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 25-Mar-2013 |
| 53 | Drug Testing Laws: Iowa A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Iowa. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 14-Feb-2013 |
| 54 | Drug Testing Laws: Kansas A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Kansas. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 17-Dec-2012 |
| 55 | Drug Testing Laws: Kentucky A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Kentucky. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 15-Mar-2013 |
| 56 | Drug Testing Laws: Louisiana A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Louisiana. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 01-Apr-2013 |
| 57 | Drug Testing Laws: Maine A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Maine. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 09-Aug-2012 |
| 58 | Drug Testing Laws: Maryland A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Maryland. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 20-Jun-2012 |
| 59 | Drug Testing Laws: Massachusetts A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Massachusetts. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 01-Feb-2013 |
| 60 | Drug Testing Laws: Michigan A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Michigan. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 05-Jun-2013 |
| 61 | Drug Testing Laws: Minnesota A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Minnesota. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 07-Feb-2013 |
| 62 | Drug Testing Laws: Mississippi A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Mississippi. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 12-Oct-2012 |
| 63 | Drug Testing Laws: Missouri A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Missouri. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 22-Mar-2013 |
| 64 | Drug Testing Laws: Nebraska A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Nebraska. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 26-Jun-2012 |
| 65 | Drug Testing Laws: Nevada A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Nevada. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 12-Dec-2012 |
| 66 | Drug Testing Laws: New Hampshire A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in New Hampshire. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 24-Oct-2012 |
| 67 | Drug Testing Laws: New Jersey A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in New Jersey. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 30-Jan-2013 |
| 68 | Drug Testing Laws: New Mexico A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in New Mexico. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 08-Apr-2013 |
| 69 | Drug Testing Laws: New York A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in New York. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 29-Mar-2013 |
| 70 | Drug Testing Laws: North Carolina A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in North Carolina. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 25-Jan-2013 |
| 71 | Drug Testing Laws: North Dakota A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in North Dakota. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 28-Mar-2013 |
| 72 | Drug Testing Laws: Ohio A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Ohio. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 05-Jul-2012 |
| 73 | Drug Testing Laws: Oklahoma A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Oklahoma. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 28-Mar-2013 |
| 74 | Drug Testing Laws: Oregon A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Oregon. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 08-Jun-2012 |
| 75 | Drug Testing Laws: Pennsylvania A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Pennsylvania. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 17-Oct-2012 |
| 76 | Drug Testing Laws: Rhode Island A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Rhode Island. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 04-Jun-2013 |
| 77 | Drug Testing Laws: South Carolina A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in South Carolina. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 19-Apr-2013 |
| 78 | Drug Testing Laws: Tennessee A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Tennessee. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 08-May-2013 |
| 79 | Drug Testing Laws: Texas A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Texas. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 25-Jun-2012 |
| 80 | Drug Testing Laws: Utah A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Utah. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 28-Mar-2013 |
| 81 | Drug Testing Laws: Virginia A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Virginia. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 29-Mar-2013 |
| 82 | Drug Testing Laws: Washington A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Washington. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 27-Mar-2013 |
| 83 | Drug Testing Laws: West Virginia A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in West Virginia. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 31-Aug-2012 |
| 84 | Drug Testing Laws: Wisconsin A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Wisconsin. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 29-Nov-2012 |
| 85 | Hiring Requirements: Alabama A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in Alabama. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 26-Mar-2012 |
| 86 | Hiring Requirements: Arizona A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in Arizona. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 22-Aug-2012 |
| 87 | Hiring Requirements: Arkansas A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in Arkansas. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 28-Feb-2013 |
| 88 | Hiring Requirements: California A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in California. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 04-Jan-2013 |
| 89 | Hiring Requirements: Colorado A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in Colorado. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 28-Mar-2013 |
| 90 | Hiring Requirements: Connecticut A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in Connecticut. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law many impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 31-May-2013 |
| 91 | Hiring Requirements: District of Columbia A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in the District of Columbia. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 17-Dec-2012 |
| 92 | Hiring Requirements: Florida A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in Florida. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 05-Sep-2012 |
| 93 | Hiring Requirements: Georgia A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in Georgia. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 21-Dec-2012 |
| 94 | Hiring Requirements: Idaho A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in Idaho. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 20-Jun-2012 |
| 95 | Hiring Requirements: Illinois A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in Illinois. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 14-Jan-2013 |
| 96 | Hiring Requirements: Indiana A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in Indiana. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 25-Mar-2013 |
| 97 | Hiring Requirements: Iowa A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in Iowa. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 09-Jan-2013 |
| 98 | Hiring Requirements: Kansas A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in Kansas. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 08-Apr-2013 |
| 99 | Hiring Requirements: Kentucky A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in Kentucky. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to quesitons can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 28-Mar-2013 |
| 100 | Hiring Requirements: Louisiana A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in Louisiana. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 25-Mar-2013 |
| 101 | Hiring Requirements: Maine A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in Mississippi. This Q&A addresses disclosure that employees must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 05-Oct-2012 |
| 102 | Hiring Requirements: Maryland A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in Maryland. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Law Q&A Tool). For a recent update on Maryland's new User Name and Password Privacy Protection and Exclusions law, see Related Content on the right. | State Q&A | 20-Feb-2013 |
| 103 | Hiring Requirements: Massachusetts A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in Massachusetts. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 07-Feb-2013 |
| 104 | Hiring Requirements: Michigan A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in Michigan. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 28-Mar-2012 |
| 105 | Hiring Requirements: Minnesota A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in Minnesota. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 01-Apr-2013 |
| 106 | Hiring Requirements: Mississippi A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in Mississippi. This Q&A addresses disclosure that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 25-Sep-2012 |
| 107 | Hiring Requirements: Missouri A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in Missouri. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Law Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 04-Dec-2012 |
| 108 | Hiring Requirements: Nebraska A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in Louisiana. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 08-May-2013 |
| 109 | Hiring Requirements: Nevada A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in Nevada. This Q&A addresses disclosure that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 17-Sep-2012 |
| 110 | Hiring Requirements: New Hampshire A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in Nevada. This Q&A addresses disclosure that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 24-Sep-2012 |
| 111 | Hiring Requirements: New Jersey A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in New Jersey. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 06-Jun-2013 |
| 112 | Hiring Requirements: New York A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in New York. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 11-Apr-2013 |
| 113 | Hiring Requirements: North Carolina A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in North Carolina. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: Q&A tool). | State Q&A | 28-Aug-2012 |
| 114 | Hiring Requirements: Ohio A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in Ohio. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 01-Apr-2013 |
| 115 | Hiring Requirements: Oklahoma A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in Oklahoma. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 25-Jan-2013 |
| 116 | Hiring Requirements: Oregon A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in Oregon. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 02-Jul-2012 |
| 117 | Hiring Requirements: Pennsylvania A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in Pennsylvania. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). For a recent update on the new E-Verify requirements for contractors and subcontractors performing public works projects for the state, see Related Content on the right. | State Q&A | 04-Feb-2013 |
| 118 | Hiring Requirements: Rhode Island A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in Rhode Island. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 08-Apr-2013 |
| 119 | Hiring Requirements: South Carolina A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in South Carolina. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 25-Mar-2013 |
| 120 | Hiring Requirements: Tennessee A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in Tennessee. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 24-May-2013 |
| 121 | Hiring Requirements: Texas A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in Texas. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 29-Jun-2012 |
| 122 | Hiring Requirements: Utah A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in Utah. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 02-May-2013 |
| 123 | Hiring Requirements: Virginia A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in Virginia. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 28-May-2013 |
| 124 | Hiring Requirements: Washington A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in Washington. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 27-Mar-2013 |
| 125 | Hiring Requirements: West Virginia A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in Nevada. This Q&A addresses disclosure that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 28-Sep-2012 |
| 126 | Hiring Requirements: Wisconsin A Q&A guide to state law on hiring requirements for private employers in Wisconsin. This Q&A addresses disclosures that employers must make to new hires, the type of information to include in the notice, when and how notice should be sent, language to include in employment applications and information that cannot be requested on employment applications. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Hiring Requirements: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 02-Jan-2013 |
| 127 | Non-compete Laws: Alabama A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Alabama. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 07-Feb-2013 |
| 128 | Non-compete Laws: Arizona A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Arizona. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 05-Nov-2012 |
| 129 | Non-compete Laws: Arkansas A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in the Arkansas. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 03-Dec-2012 |
| 130 | Non-compete Laws: California A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in California. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 08-Mar-2013 |
| 131 | Non-compete Laws: Colorado A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Colorado. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 12-Feb-2013 |
| 132 | Non-compete Laws: Connecticut A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Connecticut. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 23-Jan-2013 |
| 133 | Non-compete Laws: District of Columbia A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in the District of Columbia. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 03-Aug-2012 |
| 134 | Non-compete Laws: Florida A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Florida. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 11-Jun-2012 |
| 135 | Non-compete Laws: Georgia A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Georgia. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 24-Sep-2012 |
| 136 | Non-compete Laws: Idaho A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Idaho. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 05-Jun-2012 |
| 137 | Non-compete Laws: Illinois A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Illinois. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 27-Mar-2013 |
| 138 | Non-compete Laws: Indiana A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Indiana. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 30-Mar-2012 |
| 139 | Non-compete Laws: Iowa A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Iowa. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 18-Mar-2013 |
| 140 | Non-compete Laws: Kansas A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Kansas. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 31-Jan-2013 |
| 141 | Non-compete Laws: Kentucky A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Kentucky. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 26-Mar-2013 |
| 142 | Non-compete Laws: Louisiana A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Louisiana. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answer to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 13-Jun-2013 |
| 143 | Non-compete Laws: Maryland A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Maryland. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answer to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 19-Apr-2013 |
| 144 | Non-compete Laws: Massachusetts A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Massachusetts. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 29-Aug-2012 |
| 145 | Non-compete Laws: Michigan A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Michigan. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants, such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 23-Apr-2013 |
| 146 | Non-compete Laws: Minnesota A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Minnesota. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 05-Mar-2013 |
| 147 | Non-compete Laws: Mississippi A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Mississippi. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 26-Nov-2012 |
| 148 | Non-compete Laws: Missouri A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Missouri. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answer to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 30-Apr-2012 |
| 149 | Non-compete Laws: Nebraska A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Nebraska. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 24-Sep-2012 |
| 150 | Non-compete Laws: Nevada A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Nevada. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 19-Dec-2012 |
| 151 | Non-compete Laws: New Hampshire A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in New Hampshire. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 29-Nov-2012 |
| 152 | Non-compete Laws: New Jersey A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in New Jersey. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 22-Oct-2012 |
| 153 | Non-compete Laws: New York A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in New York. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 12-Jun-2013 |
| 154 | Non-compete Laws: North Carolina A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in North Carolina. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 05-Feb-2013 |
| 155 | Non-compete Laws: Ohio A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Ohio. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). For an update on the recent decision of the Ohio Supreme Court that a merger triggers the running of a non-compete clock, see Related Content to the right. | State Q&A | 16-Jan-2013 |
| 156 | Non-compete Laws: Oklahoma A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Oklahoma. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 25-May-2012 |
| 157 | Non-compete Laws: Oregon A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Oregon. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 30-Apr-2012 |
| 158 | Non-compete Laws: Pennsylvania A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Pennsylvania. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 05-Nov-2012 |
| 159 | Non-compete Laws: South Carolina A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in South Carolina. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 25-Feb-2013 |
| 160 | Non-compete Laws: Tennessee A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Tennessee. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 17-Sep-2012 |
| 161 | Non-compete Laws: Texas A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Texas. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 04-Mar-2013 |
| 162 | Non-compete Laws: Utah A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Utah. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answer to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 29-Aug-2012 |
| 163 | Non-compete Laws: Virginia A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Virginia. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 25-Jan-2013 |
| 164 | Non-compete Laws: Washington A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Washington. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 14-Jan-2013 |
| 165 | Non-compete Laws: West Virginia A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in West Virginia. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 19-Dec-2012 |
| 166 | Non-compete Laws: Wisconsin A Q&A guide to non-compete agreements between employers and employees for private employers in Wisconsin. This Q&A addresses enforcement and drafting considerations for restrictive covenants such as post-employment covenants not to compete and non-solicitation of customers and employees. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Non-compete Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 12-Dec-2012 |
| 167 | Trade Secret Laws: Alabama A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Alabama. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definitions of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 02-May-2012 |
| 168 | Trade Secret Laws: Arizona A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Arizona. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definitions of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 05-Nov-2012 |
| 169 | Trade Secret Laws: Arkansas A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Arkansas. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 07-Jun-2013 |
| 170 | Trade Secret Laws: California A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in California. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 01-Jun-2012 |
| 171 | Trade Secret Laws: Colorado A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Colorado. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 13-Jun-2013 |
| 172 | Trade Secret Laws: Connecticut A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Connecticut. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 09-May-2013 |
| 173 | Trade Secret Laws: District of Columbia A Q&A guide to trade secrets and confidentiality law for private employers in the District of Columbia. This Q&A addresses the District of Columbia definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements related to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 30-May-2013 |
| 174 | Trade Secret Laws: Florida A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Florida. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definitions of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 07-May-2012 |
| 175 | Trade Secret Laws: Georgia A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Georgia. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 08-May-2013 |
| 176 | Trade Secret Laws: Idaho A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Idaho. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definitions of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 13-Jul-2012 |
| 177 | Trade Secret Laws: Illinois A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Illinois. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 02-May-2012 |
| 178 | Trade Secret Laws: Indiana A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Indiana. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definitions of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 25-Mar-2013 |
| 179 | Trade Secret Laws: Iowa A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Iowa. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 27-Mar-2013 |
| 180 | Trade Secret Laws: Kansas A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Kansas. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definitions of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 11-Feb-2013 |
| 181 | Trade Secret Laws: Kentucky A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Kentucky. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 27-Jun-2012 |
| 182 | Trade Secret Laws: Louisiana A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Louisiana. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 26-Sep-2012 |
| 183 | Trade Secret Laws: Maryland A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Maryland. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). For a recent update on Maryland's new User Name and Password Privacy Protection and Exclusions law, see Related Content on the right. | State Q&A | 25-Mar-2013 |
| 184 | Trade Secret Laws: Massachusetts A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Massachusetts. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definitions of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 01-Jun-2012 |
| 185 | Trade Secret Laws: Michigan A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Michigan. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 31-May-2013 |
| 186 | Trade Secret Laws: Minnesota A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Minnesota. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 28-May-2013 |
| 187 | Trade Secret Laws: Mississippi A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Mississippi. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 24-Oct-2012 |
| 188 | Trade Secret Laws: Missouri A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Missouri. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 04-May-2012 |
| 189 | Trade Secret Laws: Nevada A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Nevada. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 24-Sep-2012 |
| 190 | Trade Secret Laws: New Hampshire A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in New Hampshire. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 19-Dec-2012 |
| 191 | Trade Secret Laws: New Jersey A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in New Jersey. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definitions of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 08-Jan-2013 |
| 192 | Trade Secret Laws: New York A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in New York. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secrets Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 01-Jun-2012 |
| 193 | Trade Secret Laws: North Carolina A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in North Carolina. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 24-Aug-2012 |
| 194 | Trade Secret Laws: Ohio A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Ohio. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 01-Jun-2012 |
| 195 | Trade Secret Laws: Oklahoma A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Oklahoma. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 23-Apr-2013 |
| 196 | Trade Secret Laws: Oregon A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Oregon. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 30-Apr-2012 |
| 197 | Trade Secret Laws: Pennsylvania A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Pennsylvania. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definitions of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 07-Aug-2012 |
| 198 | Trade Secret Laws: South Carolina A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in South Carolina. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 30-Apr-2012 |
| 199 | Trade Secret Laws: Tennessee A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Tennessee. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 19-Sep-2012 |
| 200 | Trade Secret Laws: Texas A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Texas. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definitions of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). On May 2, 2013, Texas enacted the Texas Uniform Trade Secrets Act, which takes effect on September 1, 2013 and replaces the common law governing trade secret misappropriation. For a recent update on this development, see Related Content on the right. | State Q&A | 01-Jun-2012 |
| 201 | Trade Secret Laws: Utah A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Utah. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 30-Apr-2012 |
| 202 | Trade Secret Laws: Virginia A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Virginia. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 26-Sep-2012 |
| 203 | Trade Secret Laws: Washington A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Washington. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 02-Aug-2012 |
| 204 | Trade Secret Laws: West Virginia A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in West Virginia. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 07-Dec-2012 |
| 205 | Trade Secret Laws: Wisconsin A Q&A guide to state law on trade secrets and confidentiality for private employers in Wisconsin. This Q&A addresses the state-specific definition of trade secrets and the legal requirements relating to protecting them. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Trade Secret Laws: State Q&A Tool). | State Q&A | 28-Feb-2013 |
| Articles | |||
| 1 | Drug Testing Laws: Arkansas A Q&A guide to drug testing law for private employers in Arkansas. This Q&A addresses employers' rights and restrictions when conducting workplace drug and alcohol testing of job applicants and current employees, as well as testing based on suspicion of intoxication or randomized testing. Federal, local or municipal law may impose additional or different requirements. Answers to questions can be compared across a number of jurisdictions (see Drug Testing Laws: State Q&A Tool). | Articles | 18-Dec-2012 |
| 2 | Criminal History Records in Employment: EEOC Guidance An Article on the EEOC's Guidance on the use of criminal background information, including arrest and conviction records, for employment purposes under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, including compliance requirements and best practices. | Articles | 16-Jul-2012 |
| 3 | What's Market: Executive Employment Agreements: Post ... This Article discusses post-termination non-competition provisions in executive employment agreements. It includes an analysis of the law in California, Florida, Illinois, New York and Texas on the reasonableness of duration and geographic scope restrictions, as well as examples of recent executive employment agreements with links to each underlying agreement. This Article also includes an expert Q&A with Katherine E. Perrelli of Seyfarth Shaw LLP, discussing considerations for employers with an online presence and the use of other types of restrictive covenants. | Articles | 01-May-2012 |
| 4 | Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting: Expert Q&A An expert Q&A with Michael D. Patrick of Fragomen, Del Rey, Bernsen & Loewy PC on the implications for employers of the US Supreme Court's decision in Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting, upholding Arizona's state immigration law. | Articles | 06-Dec-2011 |
| 5 | Seyfarth Shaw: Winter Workerland... Tips for Supplementing ... This Seyfarth Shaw LLP memorandum discusses some of the key issues for companies to consider when hiring seasonal employees. | Articles | 11-Nov-2010 |
| Updates | |||
| 1 | Ogletree Deakins: New Texas Law Limits Negligent Hiring ... This Law Firm Publication by Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C. discusses Texas' newly enacted Texas H.B. 1188 prohibiting most negligent hiring and negligent supervision actions against employers, general contractors and premises owners. With this law, which was signed by Governor Rick Perry on June 14th, Texas aims to increase employment opportunities for applicants with criminal records and ease employer concerns about potential liability for negligent hiring or negligent supervision. Exceptions allow plaintiffs to raise negligent hiring or negligent supervision claims if the employer knew or should have known the employee was convicted of certain offenses. The law becomes effective September 1, 2013. | Legal Update: archive | 16-Jun-2013 |
| 2 | Holland & Hart: New Nevada Law Restricts Use of Credit ... This Law Firm Publication by Holland & Hart LLP discusses Nevada's newly enacted Senate Bill 127 that will, with certain exceptions, prohibit Nevada employers from retaliating against an employee based on the results of a credit report or for refusing or failing to provide a credit report. Senate Bill 127, which becomes effective October 1, 2013, also prohibits employers from requesting or requiring any current employee or applicant to submit a consumer credit report as a condition of employment. In enacting this new law, Nevada became the tenth state to restrict the use of credit reports for employment purposes. | Legal Update: archive | 10-Jun-2013 |
| 3 | New Oregon Law Bars Employers from Requesting or ... Oregon recently enacted House Bill 2654, which prohibits an employer from requesting, compelling or otherwise coercing an employee or applicant to disclose login information associated with a personal social media account. | Legal Update: archive | 03-Jun-2013 |
| 4 | Access Denied: Employer Access to Applicant and Employee ... Resources to help employers comply with state laws regarding accessing applicant and employee social media accounts. | Legal Update: archive | 28-May-2013 |
| 5 | New Washington Law Bars Employers from Requesting ... Washington recently enacted Substitute Senate Bill 5211 (SSB 5211), which prohibits an employer from requesting, requiring or otherwise coercing an employee or applicant to disclose login information associated with a personal social networking account. | Legal Update: archive | 28-May-2013 |
| 6 | New Colorado Law Bars Employers from Requesting ... Colorado recently enacted House Bill 13-1046, which prohibits an employer from requesting, requiring or causing employees or applicants to disclose social media user names or passwords. | Legal Update: archive | 15-May-2013 |
| 7 | New I-9 Form Required Beginning May 7, 2013 Employers are reminded that the new I-9 Form is required beginning on May 7, 2013. The new Form I-9, published by US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) on March 8, 2013, replaces all prior versions. | Legal Update: archive | 02-May-2013 |
| 8 | Holland & Hart: Colorado Restricts Employers' Use of Credit ... This Law Firm Publication by Holland & Hart LLP discusses Colorado's recently enacted Employment Opportunity Act, which bars employers from obtaining or using consumer credit information for employment purposes, unless the credit information is substantially related to the employee's current or potential job. The law is effective July 1, 2013. | Legal Update: archive | 25-Apr-2013 |
| 9 | New Arkansas Law Bars Employers from Requiring or ... Arkansas recently enacted Act 1480, which prohibits an employer from requiring or requesting a current or prospective employee to disclose his username or password for a social media account. | Legal Update: archive | 25-Apr-2013 |
| 10 | New Mexico Law Bars Employers from Requesting Login ... New Mexico recently enacted the No Social Media Access for Employers Act (SB 371), which prohibits employers from requesting or requiring that a prospective employee provide a password or access to the prospective employee's social networking account. | Legal Update: archive | 15-Apr-2013 |
| 11 | USCIS Reaches H-1B Statutory Cap for FY 2014 The United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced that as of April 5, 2013, it has received a sufficient number of new H-1B visa petitions to reach the statutory cap for fiscal year 2014. USCIS has also received more than 20,000 H-1B petitions filed on behalf of persons exempt from the cap under the advanced degree exemption (commonly called the "advanced degree cap"). | Legal Update: archive | 08-Apr-2013 |
| 12 | New Utah Law Bars Employers from Requesting Login ... Utah recently enacted the Internet Employment Privacy Act (IEPA), which bans employers from asking employees and job applicants to provide login information for their personal internet accounts. | Legal Update: archive | 05-Apr-2013 |
| 13 | Check, Please! What Employers Need to Know About ... Resources for employers that use background check information on applicants for employment and current employees. | Legal Update: archive | 26-Mar-2013 |
| 14 | Jackson Lewis: New York City Enacts Legislation Prohibiting ... This Law Firm Publication by Jackson Lewis LLP discusses new legislation (814-A) amending the New York City Administrative Code to prohibit New York City employers with at least four employees from basing employment decisions on applicants' unemployed status. In addition, all employers are prohibited from publishing any job advertisement that indicates that current employment is required. This legislation was originally vetoed by Mayor Bloomberg but Bloomberg was overridden by the New York City Council on March 13, 2013. In passing this law, New York City joins New Jersey, Oregon and the District of Columbia. The law will take effect on June 11, 2013, 90 days after its enactment. | Legal Update: archive | 14-Mar-2013 |
| 15 | Stoel Rives: Oregon Supreme Court Takes Another Big Bite ... This Law Firm Publication by Stoel Rives LLP discusses Cocchiara v. Lithia Motors, in which the Oregon Supreme Court held that an internal applicant seeking a transfer, who was promised a position and encouraged to turn down a competing offer, and then told that the employer had changed its mind and didn't need him after all, has valid claims of promissory estoppel and fraudulent misrepresentation and can pursue damages for lost opportunity. This decision is a departure from prior Oregon state court cases. | Legal Update: archive | 13-Mar-2013 |
| 16 | New H-1B Visas for FY2014: Petitions Accepted Beginning ... Resources to assist employers filing H-1B petitions for foreign national workers. | Legal Update: archive | 19-Feb-2013 |
| 17 | OFCCP Issues Directive on Use of Criminal Records in ... The Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) released a directive providing federal contractors and subcontractors, federally-assisted construction contractors and subcontractors, and OFCCP personnel with information on criminal record restrictions and anti-discrimination laws. The directive is effective immediately. | Legal Update: archive | 11-Feb-2013 |
| 18 | Jackson Lewis: New Massachusetts Law Requires Staffing ... This Law Firm Publication by Jackson Lewis LLP discusses a new Massachusetts law that requires temporary staffing agencies in the state to provide temporary employees with written notice of certain information about the agency and the position employees will fill before the employees can start a new work assignment. The law, which is effective January 31, 2013, also prohibits staffing agencies from charging or accepting fees from temporary employees for certain employment-related items and services. | Legal Update: archive | 17-Jan-2013 |
| 19 | DOL Announces Effective Date of Rule on Nondisplacement ... The Department of Labor (DOL) has announced that its final rule implementing Executive Order 13495 will be effective on January 18, 2013. The Executive Order requires contractors and subcontractors offered a federal service contract on or after the effective date to offer employees employed under a predecessor contract a right of first refusal of employment. | Legal Update: archive | 14-Jan-2013 |
| 20 | Jackson Lewis: Michigan Bars Employers from Demanding ... This Law Firm Publication by Jackson Lewis LLP discusses Michigan's Internet Privacy Protection Act, which prohibits employers and prospective employers from requiring employees and applicants to grant access to, allow observation of or disclose information used to access their private Internet and e-mail accounts. The Act, which is effective as of December 28, 2012, also applies to educational institutions and their students, and prohibits employers from discharging, disciplining, failing to hire or otherwise penalizing persons who refuse to disclose information allowing access to those accounts. Anyone violating the Act is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of up to $1,000. | Legal Update: archive | 10-Jan-2013 |
| 21 | Employers Must Adopt New FCRA Summary of Rights Form The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) recently issued an updated Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) notice that employers must use when conducting background checks on employees and applicants using third parties. | Legal Update: archive | 08-Jan-2013 |
| 22 | Fisher & Phillips: Change to California Reporting ... This Law Firm Publication by Fisher & Phillips LLP discusses a change to an existing California requirement mandating that employers report the hiring of new employees working in California to the California Employment Development Department's (EDD) New Employee registry. The change, which takes effect in 2013, specifies that individuals who are rehired by an employer after an absence of 60 days or more are considered new hires and must be reported in the same way as individuals who have never worked for the company. California has a separate set of requirements for reporting the hiring of independent contractors. | Legal Update: archive | 20-Dec-2012 |
| 23 | Employer Required to Bargain About Implementing E-Verify ... An advice memorandum from the General Counsel's Office's of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) found that an employer with a union-represented workforce violated Section 8(a)(5) of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) by unilaterally enrolling in E-Verify. | Legal Update: archive | 07-Dec-2012 |
| 24 | Jackson Lewis: Massachusetts Legalizes the Medical Use of ... This Law Firm Publication by Jackson Lewis LLP discusses the new Massachusetts law legalizing the medical use of marijuana. Massachusetts is the 18th US state to pass such a law. The new law applies to patients suffering from debilitating medical conditions such as cancer, glaucoma, HIV, AIDS, hepatitis C, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, Crohn’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, multiple sclerosis, or other conditions determined by a physician. The new law, which is effective January 1, 2013, eliminates criminal penalties for patients, physicians and marijuana dispensaries. It does not, however, require employers to accommodate on-site use of medical marijuana or authorize operation of motor vehicles under the influence of marijuana. | Legal Update: archive | 07-Dec-2012 |
| 25 | Ogletree Deakins: What Employers Should Know About ... This Law Firm Publication by Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C. discusses the implications for employers of Amendment 64 to the Colorado Constitution, which legalizes the recreational use of marijuana in Colorado. Despite the passage of the law, Ogletree Deakins concludes that drug testing for marijuana remains permissible in Colorado, and that employers can still take action against employees found to be in violation of carefully crafted drug policies. | Legal Update: archive | 30-Nov-2012 |
| 26 | Jackson Lewis: Enforcement of Tennessee Worker-verification ... This Law Firm Publication by Jackson Lewis LLP discusses the Tennessee Lawful Employment Act (TLEA), which went into effect in January of 2012 and which the Tennessee Department of Labor has just recently begun to enforce. Under the TLEA, employers with more than six employees must either use E-Verify or make and retain copies of one of 11 specified documents. Private employers with 500 or more employees were required to comply with the TLEA as of January 1, 2012, and those with between 200 and 499 employees were required to comply as of July 1, 2012. Employers with between six and 199 employees must be in compliance by January 1, 2013. In determining the number of employees, an employer must count all of its employees, not just those that are physically in Tennessee. | Legal Update: archive | 19-Oct-2012 |
| 27 | Ogletree Deakins: Newark, New Jersey Passes Ordinance ... This Law Firm Publication by Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C. discusses a new ordinance passed by the city of Newark, New Jersey, which places limits on employers' use of criminal background checks. Among other things, the law: Prohibits criminal history checks of an applicant before a conditional offer of employment. Bars employers from checking an applicant's criminal history unless the employer has made a good faith determination that the position is sensitive enough to require it. Requires written consent prior to conducting a criminal history check. Allows individuals to contest the accuracy and relevance of a check following an adverse employment decision. The law, which applies to employers with five or more employees in Newark, takes effect on November 18, 2012. | Legal Update: archive | 15-Oct-2012 |
| 28 | California Governor Signs Multiple Employment-related Bills ... California Governor Jerry Brown signed multiple employment-related bills into law in September 2012, covering such areas as wage payment laws and notification requirements, anti-discrimination laws and social media laws. | Legal Update: archive | 08-Oct-2012 |
| 29 | Honigman Miller: Sixth Circuit Rules Michigan's Medical ... This Law Firm Publication by Honigman Miller Schwartz and Cohn LLP discusses the US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit's decision in Casias v. Wal-Mart Stores Inc., ruling that an employer did not violate the Michigan Medical Marihuana Act (MMMA) when it terminated an employee with a state-issued medical marijuana registry card for failing a drug test. The court held that the MMMA, which legalized the use of marijuana for certain medical purposes, only regulates action taken by Michigan, not by private employers. Although the Sixth Circuit's decision is binding on federal trial courts, Michigan state courts are not required to follow it. | Legal Update: archive | 02-Oct-2012 |
| 30 | Jackson Lewis: California Becomes Third State to Limit ... This Law Firm Publication by Jackson Lewis LLP discusses Assembly Bill 1844 and Senate Bill 1349, two bills signed by California Governor Jerry Brown on September 27, 2012. Assembly Bill 1844 limits when employers may ask applicants and employees for their social media passwords and account information, although the law allows employers to ask an employee to reveal personal social media activity that it reasonably believes is relevant to an investigation into employee misconduct. Senate Bill 1349 creates similar prohibitions for postsecondary education students. The laws take effect on January 1, 2013. | Legal Update: archive | 30-Sep-2012 |
| 31 | Ogletree Deakins: Staggered Implementation of North ... This Law Firm Publication by Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C. discusses North Carolina's E-Verify Legislation, which was signed into law on June 23, 2011. While counties and municipalities were required to participate in the E-Verify program last year, private sector employers will begin their participation on October 1, 2012, starting with employers with 500 or more employees in North Carolina. Employers with at least 100 but fewer than 500 employees must use E-Verify as of January 1, 2013, and employers with at least 25 but fewer than 100 employees must comply by July 1, 2013. | Legal Update: archive | 21-Sep-2012 |
| 32 | Foley Hoag: New Law Imposes Obligations on Staffing ... This Law Firm Publication by Foley Hoag LLP discusses the Temporary Workers' Right to Know Act, which was recently enacted by the Massachusetts legislature. Effective January 31, 2013, the new law requires staffing agencies to provide temporary employees with specific information about each of their work assignments, including a description of the position, designated pay days and the hourly rate of pay, as well as the name, address and telephone number of the staffing agency and the work site employer. The law also prohibits staffing agencies and work site employers from deducting any costs or fees from an employee's wages without express written authorization. | Legal Update: archive | 21-Aug-2012 |
| 33 | Jackson Lewis: Arm's Length Negotiations Between ... This Law Firm Publication by Jackson Lewis LLP discusses Williams v. Smith, in which the Minnesota Supreme Court held that a prospective employee, an assistant coach of a college basketball team, could not assert a claim for negligent misrepresentation against the team's head coach, who offered and later rescinded a job opportunity. A negligent representation claim is unavailable where a prospective employment relationship is negotiated at arm's length between sophisticated business persons and does not involve a professional, fiduciary or other special legal relationship. In Williams, the coaches engaged in an arm's length negotiation, and therefore the head coach did not owe a duty of care to the assistant. | Legal Update: archive | 15-Aug-2012 |
| 34 | New Illinois Law Bars Employers from Requesting Login ... Illinois Governor Pat Quinn signed into law HB 3782, which bars employers from requesting login information or demanding access to employees' and applicants' accounts on social networking websites. The law is scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2013. | Legal Update: archive | 03-Aug-2012 |
| 35 | Jackson Lewis: Employee Must Arbitrate Individual Wage ... This Law Firm Publication by Jackson Lewis LLP discusses the California Court of Appeal's decision in Nelsen v. Legacy Partners Residential, Inc., ruling that an employee must arbitrate her individual wage and hour claims against her employer where an arbitration agreement between the parties was not unconscionable or in violation of public policy. Notably, the court rejected the employee’s argument that the agreement was unenforceable because it violated federal public policy under the National Labor Relations Board's (NLRB) decision in D.R. Horton. The court found that the issues in D.R. Horton were outside the expertise of the NLRB, that the holding had been rejected by at least two other federal courts, and that there was no evidence that the plaintiff in Nelsen was covered by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). | Legal Update: archive | 31-Jul-2012 |
| 36 | Fisher & Phillips: New Pennsylvania Law Requires E-Verify ... This Law Firm Publication by Fisher & Phillips LLP discusses Pennsylvania's Public Works Employment Verification Act, which requires contractors and subcontractors performing public works projects for the state to use E-Verify for all new employees. Effective January 1, 2013, contractors and subcontractors that seek a contract on a project must first submit a form verifying compliance to the public agency awarding the contract. The law prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, color or national origin and also prohibits retaliation against employees who report a violation or assist in a government investigation. The state Department of General Services will enforce the law and perform audits for compliance. | Legal Update: archive | 16-Jul-2012 |
| 37 | Ogletree Deakins: Massachusetts Criminal Record ... This Law Firm Publication by Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C. discusses the final regulations that accompany the Massachusetts Criminal Offender Record Information (CORI) Reform Act. The regulations clarify how employers can obtain and use criminal history information for applicants and employees. The regulations were issued by the Massachusetts Department of Criminal Justice Information Services (DCJIS) and are effective immediately. | Legal Update: archive | 02-Jul-2012 |
| 38 | FTC Proposes Settlement with Spokeo for FCRA and FTC Act ... The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has announced a proposed settlement with Spokeo, Inc., a data brokerage company that compiles and sells detailed consumer information, over charges that it violated the Fair Credit and Reporting Act (FCRA) and the FTC Act. This is the first FTC case to address the sale of online data, including data from social media, in the context of employee screening. | Legal Update: archive | 14-Jun-2012 |
| 39 | Jackson Lewis: New Connecticut Medical Marijuana Law This Law Firm Publication by Jackson Lewis LLP discusses a new Connecticut law permitting the palliative use of medical marijuana by qualified individuals with debilitating medical conditions. The law is administered by the Department of Consumer Protection (DCP) and takes effect on October 1, 2012. Connecticut is the 17th state to pass a medical marijuana law. | Legal Update: archive | 13-Jun-2012 |
| 40 | Jackson Lewis: Vermont Joins Growing Number of States ... This Law Firm Publication by Jackson Lewis LLP discusses a new Vermont law that will restrict Vermont employers from asking about or using an applicant's or employee's credit report or history to make employment decisions, with limited exceptions. The law will be effective July 1, 2012. Seven US states have already passed similar legislation. | Legal Update: archive | 13-Jun-2012 |
| 41 | USCIS Reaches H-1B Statutory Cap for Fiscal Year 2013 The United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has announced that as of June 11, 2012, it had received a sufficient number of new H-1B visa specialty occupation petitions to reach the statutory cap for fiscal year 2013. In addition, as of June 7, 2012, the advanced degree exemption has been exhausted. | Legal Update: archive | 12-Jun-2012 |
| 42 | Jackson Lewis: California Court of Appeal Enforces Class ... This Law Firm Publication by Jackson Lewis LLP discusses a California Court of Appeal's decision in Iskanian v. CLS Transportation upholding a class action waiver in an arbitration agreement and distinguishing the National Labor Relations Board's (NLRB) decision in D.R. Horton. The court followed AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, noting Concepcion made no exception for employment-related disputes in reiterating the general rule that arbitration agreements must be enforced according to their terms. The court also held the arbitration agreement barred the plaintiff from bringing claims under the California Private Attorney General Act (PAGA). | Legal Update: archive | 04-Jun-2012 |
| 43 | PF Chang's Arbitration Agreement with Class Action Waiver ... The US District Court for the Northern District of California recently upheld an arbitration agreement containing a class action waiver, holding that AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, which articulates a strong federal policy of enforcing arbitration agreements, controls. The court distinguished D.R. Horton, Inc., finding the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) does not bar enforcement of agreements to arbitrate non-NLRA claims on an individual basis. | Legal Update: archive | 14-May-2012 |
| 44 | New Maryland Law Bars Employers from Requesting Login ... On May 2, 2012, Maryland became the first state to bar employers from seeking login information from employees or applicants for personal electronic accounts, including social media accounts, when Governor Martin O'Malley signed the User Name and Password Privacy Protection and Exclusions law. The law also prohibits employees from downloading an employer's proprietary information. The law is scheduled to take effect on October 1, 2012. | Legal Update: archive | 03-May-2012 |
| 45 | EEOC Issues Updated Guidance on Employer Use of Arrest ... The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued updated guidance and related questions and answers on employer use of arrest and conviction records in making employment decisions under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII). | Legal Update: archive | 25-Apr-2012 |
| 46 | Ogletree Deakins: Massachusetts Criminal Record Law ... This Law Firm Publication by Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C. discusses changes to Massachusetts criminal record laws effective May 4, 2012 under the Massachusetts Criminal Offender Record Information (CORI) Reform Act. Among other changes, employers that annually conduct at least five criminal background checks must maintain written CORI policies, and must provide an individual with a copy of any criminal record information on which the employer bases an adverse employment decision. | Legal Update: archive | 19-Mar-2012 |
| 47 | Mobile Background Screening Apps May Be Consumer ... The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued a sample letter warning mobile application marketers that their background screening applications could qualify as consumer reporting agencies under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). | Legal Update: archive | 07-Feb-2012 |
| 48 | Honigman Miller: Detroit Prohibits Criminal Background ... This Honigman Miller Schwartz and Cohn LLP memorandum discusses a new City of Detroit ordinance that prohibits city contractors from inquiring about a job applicant’s criminal background before they conduct an in-person interview. The ordinance takes effect on February 1, 2012 and applies to all companies that have at least one contract with the City of Detroit valued at $25,000 or more. | Legal Update: archive | 24-Jan-2012 |
| 49 | Arbitration Provision with Class and Collective Action Waiver ... In LaVoice v. UBS Financial Services, Inc., the US District Court for the Southern District of New York granted a motion to compel arbitration of the plaintiff's Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and state wage and hour claims despite a class and collective action waiver. The court found AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion, precluded LaVoice's argument that the FLSA creates an unwaivable right to collective actions. Notably, the court rejected the argument that D.R. Horton, Inc. supported a contrary reading of AT&T Mobility. | Legal Update: archive | 23-Jan-2012 |
| 50 | Honigman Miller: Amendments to Michigan's Employment ... This Honigman Miller Schwartz and Cohn LLP memorandum discusses amendments to Michigan's unemployment insurance and workers' compensation laws, including notice that employers should consider providing to employees at the time of hire. These amendments went into effect on December 19, 2011. | Legal Update: archive | 10-Jan-2012 |
| 51 | Mandatory Arbitration Agreement Prohibiting Class and ... The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) recently held that requiring employees, as a condition of employment, to sign an arbitration agreement prohibiting them from filing collective or class actions for employment-related claims violates the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). In its January 3, 2012 decision in D.R. Horton, Inc., the NLRB also held that its decision does not conflict with the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) and distinguished AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion. | Legal Update: archive | 10-Jan-2012 |
| 52 | New Jersey Trade Secrets Act Signed by Governor The New Jersey Trade Secrets Act has been signed into law by Governor Christie. This law creates specific remedies for employers to protect trade secrets from misappropriation. | Legal Update: archive | 10-Jan-2012 |
| 53 | New California Employment Laws Effective on January 1 ... A list of new California employment-related laws effective on January 1, 2012 and covering areas such as pay notices, credit checks, pregnancy disability leave and independent contractors, among others. | Legal Update: archive | 29-Dec-2011 |
| 54 | Ogletree Deakins: Illinois Supreme Court Rejects Use of Rigid ... This Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C. memorandum discusses Reliable Fire Equipment Company v. Arredondo, in which the Illinois Supreme Court held that courts may not use rigid, structured tests in determining whether a legitimate business interest exists as they analyze the enforceability of non-competition restrictive covenants. This decision resolves a split among the Illinois appellate courts. | Legal Update: archive | 06-Dec-2011 |
| 55 | Medical Residency Not Permanent Employment for Purposes ... In The Matters of Albert Einstein Medical Center and Abington Memorial Hospital, the Board of Alien Labor Certification Appeals (BALCA) reviewed the Employment and Training Administration Certifying Officer (CO)'s denial of permanent labor certification applications made by two hospitals on behalf of their foreign medical residents. The CO's denial was on the grounds that the medical resident positions do not constitute permanent employment. BALCA determined that most medical residency programs do not constitute permanent employment. It vacated the denials and remanded the appeals to the CO to provide them with an opportunity to demonstrate that their residency programs fit the definition of permanent employment as required under the PERM regulations. | Legal Update: archive | 29-Nov-2011 |
| 56 | USCIS Reaches H-1B Statutory Cap for Fiscal Year 2012 The United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has announced that as of November 22, 2011, it had received a sufficient number of new H-1B visa specialty occupation petitions to reach the statutory cap for fiscal year 2012. In addition, as of October 19, 2011, the advanced degree exemption has been exhausted. | Legal Update: archive | 29-Nov-2011 |
| 57 | Ogletree Deakins: New Mandatory Poster and Notice Issued ... This Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C. memorandum discusses the new six-page notice, MW-400 (11/11), that was issued on November 4, 2011, by the New Jersey Department of Labor and Workforce Development (NJDOL). The notice is in accordance with the requirements of a 2009 statute, P.L. 2009, c. 194, relating to the maintenance and reporting of employment records. Employers must immediately provide the notice to all new employees and have until December 7, 2011 to distribute it to current employees. | Legal Update: archive | 07-Nov-2011 |
| 58 | Jackson Lewis: Oklahoma Makes Workplace Drug and ... This Jackson Lewis LLP memorandum discusses the substantial revisions to the Oklahoma Standards For Workplace Drug and Alcohol Testing Act (Okla. Stat. §§ 551 - 563). The revisions, which became effective on November 1, 2011, simplify the law and make it more employer-friendly. The revisions include reductions in written policy requirements and in the required notice period, and a replacement of the "reasonable suspicion" test with a "for cause" test based on a "reasonable belief" standard for employers. The revised law also permits testing of independent contractors under certain circumstances. | Legal Update: archive | 04-Nov-2011 |
| 59 | New California Laws Covering Credit Reports, Pay Notices ... New employment laws cover areas such as consumer credit reports, penalties for willful independent contractor misclassification, written commission agreements and pay information notices for newly hired employees, among other areas. | Legal Update: archive | 11-Oct-2011 |
| 60 | Ogletree Deakins: New Jersey Amends Employee Leasing ... This Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C. memorandum discusses recent amendments to the New Jersey statute governing employee leasing companies (also known as professional employer organizations, or PEOs). The amended law clarifies the rights and responsibilities of the parties to an employee leasing agreement. In particular, the client company, not the leasing company, must supervise the leased employees, and will be responsible for the nature of the goods or services they produce. The new statute also changes several operating requirements for employee leasing companies, including registration and filing requirements. | Legal Update: archive | 04-Oct-2011 |
| 61 | Ogletree Deakins: New York Employers Required to Report ... This Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C. memorandum discusses new reporting requirements for employers relating to family health insurance. Under the New York Low-Income Support Obligation and Performance Improvement Act, which became effective on July 15, 2011, employers must report to the state Department of Tax and Finance whether they offer family health insurance when reporting on new hires and in quarterly wage reports. | Legal Update: archive | 04-Oct-2011 |
| 62 | Ogletree Deakins: Connecticut Law Limits Background ... This Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C. memorandum discusses a new Connecticut law governing background checks in the employment context. Effective October 1, 2011, covered employers may not require employees or job applicants to consent to credit reports that include credit scores, account balances, payment history and related information. Limited exceptions exist for financial institutions, employers legally required to obtain credit reports with this information, employers that reasonably believe the employee violated the law related to his employment, and if the report is substantially related to the job or the employer has a bona fide job-related reason for requesting or using the information. | Legal Update: archive | 03-Oct-2011 |
| 63 | One-person Employment Contract Not an ERISA Plan: Eighth ... In Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern Railroad Corporation v. Schieffer, the US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit ruled that a one-person employment contract is not a plan under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). However, the court held that a federal court may still have jurisdiction over portions of the complaint and remanded the case with instructions for addressing ERISA preemption. | Legal Update: archive | 15-Aug-2011 |
© 2013 Thomson Reuters. All rights reserved. Use of Practical Law websites and services is subject to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.