ONS Edition 18

Article: Preparing for a Future ICE Storm? Steps Employers Can Take to Prepare for Expected Increase in Immigration Enforcement. (Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP, 12th December 2024)

Article Summary: Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is expected to launch a substantial surge in workplace investigations once President-elect Donald Trump assumes office. Employers are obligated to confirm and record the identification and employment eligibility of every person they recruit according to the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986. There are both civil and criminal consequences for businesses that hire illegal immigrants. For specific reasons, including as reacting to emergencies, executing warrants, or following a fleeing criminal, ICE is authorized to access non-public sections of a worksite. In addition, they are able to legally serve employers with a Notice of Inspection (NOI), which requires the production of various documents. These documents may include payroll and tax records, information about the company's ownership, details about staffing vendors, copies of Employment Eligibility Verification Form I-9s, and any other copies of employee documents that display their identity or authorization. Given that there are almost 14 million undocumented immigrants now residing and working in the United States, it is imperative that companies take steps to minimize the impact of ICE worksite enforcement visits and the risk of being held accountable for breaches. These encompass providing training to frontline employees, creating transparent procedures, assessing potential threats to compliance, and guaranteeing compliance with the I-9 form. In addition to identifying compliance risks and enacting I-9 compliance standards, employers should think about training their frontline staff, creating clear protocols for senior management and in-house counsel, and conducting regular compliance reviews. While the Trump administration's overall policy goals remain unclear, corporations must respond to ICE enforcement activities in a way that minimizes operational interruption and legal exposure.

Article: Can Your Organization Weather the Storm? Wage and Hour Concerns for Employers During Inclement Weather. (Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C., 12th December 2024)

Article Summary: Wage and hour concerns arise when firms close their doors for the winter. There can be no deductions for absences induced by employers, therefore during weather-related company closures, employers must pay exempt employees their promised compensation. Normally, companies must pay non-exempt workers for all hours worked. However, if a weather-related shutdown prevents non-exempt workers from working remotely, employers are not obligated to do so. As at any other time, wage and hour requirements are affected by connectivity issues during bad weather. Policies and communication plans on reporting to work, working remotely, and managing connectivity issues may need to be implemented by employers. Non-exempt workers are liable for paying for all hours worked, while exempt workers are only needed to pay their promised compensation. Problems with public and private utilities, power lines, and phone lines can occur during storms, which can impact remote work and communication. No matter what happens with connectivity, employers still have a responsibility to pay exempt employees on a weekly basis. Employers can take steps to address wage and hour concerns by including procedures for handling emergencies in employee handbooks and communicating expectations to exempt and non-exempt workers ahead of time in the event of weather-related closures or interruptions to work.

Article: Why Employers Should Consider Implementing an AI Policy and How to Do It. (Maynard Nexsen, 12th December 2024)

Article Summary: While AI has the potential to streamline operations for businesses and their workers, it also raises concerns about data privacy, ethical considerations, and intellectual property infringement. Many workers are already making use of AI tools, and both the federal and state governments have moved to control the technology. Organizations should consider the EEO (Equal Opportunity, Non-discrimination, Accessibility, Privacy) policies, acceptable and prohibited uses, a list of acceptable AI tools, data verification, a usage log, a data protection officer, and related policy updates to ensure the ethical use of AI tools. Implementing a usage record, enlisting a Data Protection Officer, applying EEO policies to AI tools, verifying data created by AI tools, updating related policies for consistency and compliance with applicable laws, and so on are all important parts of any comprehensive EEO policy. Lawsuits and damage to the company's image are two possible outcomes of not having an AI policy in place.

Article: Trump 2.0: White House and Congressional Republicans Poised to Use the Congressional Review Act for Swift Regulatory Rollback. (Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, 12th December 2024)

Article Summary: In the United States, Congress has the power to examine, and, in certain cases, repeal newly issued federal rules by executive branch agencies thanks to the Congressional Review Act (CRA). When an outgoing administration issues "midnight regulations" in its last days in office, it works wonders for resolving those issues. Preliminary Executive Orders suspending late-stage agency action and directives from the Biden era and initiating formal procedures to rescind and suspend regulations are two ways the incoming second Trump administration plans to reduce federal regulation and bureaucracy. As a component of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act, the CRA was passed in 1996 and streamlines the procedure by which Congress can reject rules, especially those that are unpopular or burdensome. Agency Reporting Requirements, a 60-day legislative review period, expedited Senate deliberation, a joint resolution of disapproval, and a restriction on reissuing the rule are all parts of it. Since a joint resolution of disapproval necessitates the approval of a majority in both the House of Representatives and the Senate as well as the president's signature, the CRA is rarely invoked when different parties have control of the two houses of Congress and the executive branch. It is common practice to utilize the CRA to reverse regulations passed by the previous government of the opposition party after an election. Under the Clean Air Act (CRA), regulations published during the last sixty days of a session can be reviewed by Congress. The following Congress is anticipated to examine any regulations released by the Biden administration after early August 2024. Because they were enacted earlier in Biden's term, many significant policies issued by the Biden administration are likely to be beyond the CRA "lookback" window. The CRA will, however, must deal with a plethora of new and forthcoming agency regulations. The following are some of the most common characteristics of rules that are likely to be repealed: Rules adopted extremely late in the previous administration, controversial or politically sensitive rules, rules with substantial economic or compliance costs, rules issued without bipartisan support, and rules with weak public or stakeholder support. For example, the LCRI for safe drinking water, the rule to help people comply with the Waste Emissions Charge in the Clean Air Act's Methane Emissions Reduction Program, and the EPA's proposed regulations on high priority chemicals are all rules that were enacted during the Biden administration and could be repealed under the CRA. Using the CRA can be difficult due to conflicting priorities, such as a large tax reform package, and the fact that Congress only has 60 legislative days to act on qualified rules.