• EEOC’s New Direction: The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has scrapped its two-year-old enforcement priorities and rescinded 40-year-old affirmative action guidance in favor of a federal strategy that deprioritizes disparate impact liability and focuses enforcement on disparate treatment claims.
• State-Level Backlash: Multiple states—including California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, and New York—have expanded or maintained disparate impact liability in their civil rights laws, creating direct conflict with federal EEOC priorities.
• AI and Automated Hiring at Risk: The divergence between federal and state regulators leaves employers uncertain about compliance when using facially neutral employment technologies, including artificial intelligence (AI)-driven hiring tools and standardized testing validation.

In this episode of Employment Law This Week^®, Epstein Becker Green attorney Deborah DeHart Cannavino discusses the EEOC’s shift in focus from disparate impact to disparate treatment enforcement and what it means for multistate employers navigating a regulatory patchwork.

• Agencies Lose Their Independence: In Trump v. Slaughter, the U.S. Supreme Court held that federal agencies such as the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) are not “independent.” The NLRB’s Board members and General Counsel serve at the President’s pleasure and can be removed at any time, for any reason—or for no reason.
• The Ripple Effect on the NLRB: Although the Slaughter ruling doesn’t affect other positions at the NLRB, it has the potential to have a significant trickle-down effect on those who report to the NLRB’s Board members or General Counsel. This will likely be compounded by the administration’s efforts to remove civil service protections for many positions at the NLRB as well as other agencies.
• A New Circuit Split on the Standard for Section 10(j) Injunctions: Applying the traditional four-part test for the first time since the Supreme Court’s decision in Starbucks Corp. v. McKinney, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit declined to accept an NLRB Regional Director’s contention that irreparable harm would result from an employer’s refusal to bargain, splitting with the Ninth and Fourth Circuits over the standard for granting injunctive relief under Section 10(j) of the National Labor Relations Act.

• Federal Agencies Propose Fertility Benefit Expansion: The U.S. Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and the Treasury have issued a proposed rule to allow employers to provide fertility coverage as a limited excepted benefit, exempt from the Affordable Care Act and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act’s portability requirements.
• DOT Clarifies Medical Marijuana in Drug Tests: The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) has confirmed that a positive drug test for marijuana is disqualifying, regardless of whether the employee has a state medical marijuana license.
• Massachusetts Court Upholds Whistleblower Protections: According to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, whistleblowers in the state are protected, even if they’re complicit in the violation.

• States Lead on Workplace AI: With federal regulators slowing new rules, individual states are setting their own requirements for employers that use artificial intelligence (AI), creating a patchwork for multistate workforces.
• California’s Executive Order: Governor Gavin Newsom issued an executive order (EO) targeting AI-driven labor market disruption and directing state agencies to recommend updates to California’s Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act for AI-related mass layoffs.
• Connecticut’s New AI Law: Beginning October 1, 2027, employers must give written notice to applicants and employees when AI substantially influences a hiring, promotion, discipline, or termination decision.

In this episode of Employment Law This Week®, Epstein Becker Green attorneys Courtney McFate and Elizabeth S. Torkelsen break down two state actions shaping AI in the workplace: California Governor Newsom’s EO on labor protections in the age of AI, and Connecticut’s new transparency and nondiscrimination requirements for employers.

This regulatory action follows last summer’s Executive Order (EO) 14332 Improving Oversight of Federal Grantmaking, issued August 7, 2025. It covers most Executive Branch agencies, including those that directly regulate employers and the health care sector in particular, such as the Department of Labor, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, and the Department of Health and Human Services. This overhaul of federal grantmaking is potentially impactful on any organization – including universities and other educational institutions, arts organizations, manufacturers, healthcare providers and researchers, and other entities that rely on federal funding for research grants and other monies.

• Two Federal Agencies Target DEI: The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) is urging its employees to file whistleblower complaints and report diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) activities that violate the administration’s ban. Additionally, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission released a 2025-2029 National Enforcement Plan that prioritizes enforcement against DEI-related discrimination.
• DOL Opinion Letters: The DOL’s Wage and Hour Division published four opinion letters addressing overtime exemptions, bonuses, meal breaks, and compensable work. While these letters do not signal dramatic shifts in the DOL’s position, they provide greater clarity, consistency, and transparency.
• PAGA Standing: A California appeals court held that an employee who loses in individual arbitration may also lose standing to bring a representative claim under the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA).

For employers operating across the region, the clock is ticking: the Act takes effect July 1, 2026, and imposes both pay disclosure requirements and restrictions on when they may consider an individual’s prior compensation when making employment decisions.

• EEOC Proposes Eliminating EEO-1 Reports: The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is proposing the complete elimination of EEO-1 reports (which include employee demographic data, such as race and gender), along with the rescission of EEO-2, EEO-3, EEO-4, and EEO-5 reports. 
• Fifth Circuit Rules on Remote Work Accommodations: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit found that in-person attendance is an essential job function and that COVID-era accommodations do not define that standard today—a ruling that could prove informative as more employers implement return-to-office policies.
• New Non-Compete Restrictions in Tennessee: Beginning July 1, 2026, non-compete agreements will be unenforceable in Tennessee for employees who earn less than $70,000 a year (inclusive of wages, salary, commissions, nondiscretionary bonuses, and other forms of remuneration).

• Virginia and Maine Pay Transparency Laws: Both states require employers to disclose compensation ranges in job postings starting this summer (Virginia on July 1 and Maine on July 29), with key distinctions that will affect compliance strategies across industries.
• Remote Work Compliance Risks: Pay transparency laws can apply to any employer with even a single remote employee working in a covered state, which means that multistate and remote-first employers face heightened exposure regardless of where they are headquartered.
• Evolving Pay Equity Landscape: From salary history bans to pay transparency mandates, states continue to layer on new pay equity requirements, making proactive human resources (HR) training and policy audits more critical than ever.

In this episode of Employment Law This Week^®, Epstein Becker Green attorneys Adam M. Tomiak and Nancy Gunzenhauser Popper discuss Virginia’s and Maine’s new pay transparency laws, how they differ from other state laws, what the growing patchwork of pay equity requirements means for employers, and the steps organizations should take now to prepare their recruiters, HR teams, and job posting practices.

• DOL Proposes Joint Employer Rule: The Department of Labor (DOL) has proposed a rule reinstating the economic realities test for joint employer liability under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), the Family and Medical Leave Act, and the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act, prompting employers with subcontractors, franchises, or subsidiaries to assess their exposure before the June 22 comment deadline.
• Fifth Circuit: Misclassification Alone Isn't Enough: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit upheld a verdict denying overtime pay to a misclassified worker, finding that, under the FLSA, an employer cannot be liable for overtime of which it had no knowledge.
• I-9 and Accessibility Rules Tighten: Immigration and Customs Enforcement has reclassified nearly all Form I-9 errors as uncorrectable "substantive" violations subject to significant fines. Separately, health care organizations receiving Department of Health and Human Services funding face a May 11 web accessibility deadline that is not covered by the Department of Justice's recent Americans with Disabilities Act Title II extension.

• NLRB Nomination Signals Shifting Board Majority: The nomination of James Macy—packaged with the renomination of Democratic Member David Prouty—could give the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB” or “Board”) a three-person Republican majority, providing the votes needed to overturn Biden-era precedents.
• Quorum Pressure Drives Confirmation Timeline: The Senate must confirm at least one nominee before Member Prouty’s term expires in August to preserve the Board’s quorum, making a swift confirmation process likely.
• Key Precedents on the Chopping Block: With a third Republican vote, the Board is expected to revisit the captive audience meeting rule, the Cemex bargaining order decision, Thryv’s expanded remedies, and standards for evaluating employer work rules.

In this episode of Employment Law This Week^®, Epstein Becker Green attorney Michael S. Ferrell discusses what a three-person Republican majority on the NLRB would mean for employers and which Biden-era precedents are most likely to be reconsidered.

• False Claims Act Exposure: The Department of Justice's (DOJ's) Civil Rights Fraud Initiative is scrutinizing any entity that contracts with or receives funding from the federal government whose diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) practices may violate the False Claims Act.
• April 25 Deadline for Federal Contractors: A new executive order requires federal contractors and their subcontractors to certify that they will not engage in discriminatory DEI programs. Federal contractors must act now to meet the looming compliance deadline.
• Multifront Enforcement Risk for All Employers: Private employers should also take note—investigations, subpoenas, and contract obligations are hitting from multiple directions, often before litigation even begins, as the DOJ and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission signal aggressive enforcement of anti-discrimination laws.

In this episode of Employment Law This Week^®, Epstein Becker Green attorneys Leah Brownlee Taylor and Lauri F. Rasnick unpack the administration's escalating DEI enforcement actions.

• DOL Proposes Opening 401(k) Investments: The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) proposed a rule establishing a process-based safe harbor for fiduciaries under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, opening the door to alternative assets—including cryptocurrency, private equity, and real estate—in 401(k) plans.
• NLRB Wants Its Removal Protections Stripped: The National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB” or “Board”) asked a federal court to declare unconstitutional the statutory provisions limiting the U.S. president's ability to remove members of the NLRB and administrative law judges—marking the first time the Board itself has taken this position.
• Compliance with Military Leave Requests: Amid ongoing global conflicts, employers should prepare for an influx of military leave requests and review their obligations under the federal Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, as well as any applicable state law.

• Artificial Intelligence (AI) Conversations Are Not Privileged: In United States v. Heppner, a federal judge found that conversations with an AI tool are not privileged due to the tool's terms of service and privacy policy—a stark reminder that employers should not discuss active cases or employment matters with public AI tools.
• IT Company Fined for AI-Generated Job Postings: The U.S. Department of Justice imposed a nearly $10,000 fine on an IT company for posting AI-generated job advertisements that unlawfully excluded U.S. citizens—highlighting the need for employers to keep a human in the loop when using AI in hiring.
• Washington Bars Mandatory Employee Microchipping: Starting in mid-June 2026, Washington State will prohibit mandatory employee microchip implants, joining more than a dozen states that have banned the practice.
• Colorado Works to Repeal 2024 AI Law: A working group has proposed repealing and replacing Colorado's comprehensive AI law before its June 30, 2026, effective date, which would remove onerous compliance and reporting obligations on employers, including small businesses.