Tim Coffield is a practicing attorney who is licensed in Virginia and North Carolina. He resides in Charlottesville, Virginia. He owns and operates Coffield PLC.
Virginia Minimum Wage Act: Increased Minimum Wages for Virginia Workers
The Virginia Minimum Wage Act, VA Code § 40.1-28.8, et seq. (“VMWA”), sets minimum wage levels for certain categories of Virginia workers that are higher than the federal minimum wage.
Cruz v. Maypa: Equitable Tolling in FLSA Cases
In Cruz v. Maypa, 773 F.3d 138 (4th Cir. 2014), the Fourth Circuit held that the limitations period for claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act was equitably tolled because the employer failed to post the required notice explaining workers’ rights under the FLSA. The decision is important because it means an employer who fails to post the required notice may lose its ability to assert a statute of limitations defense in FLSA cases.
Statutory Background
Congress enacted the FLSA “to protect ...
Virginia Gap Pay Act: Special Overtime Rights for Fire Protection and Law Enforcement Employees
The Virginia Gap Pay Act, VA Code § 9.1-700, et seq. (“VGPA”), provides that certain fire protection and law enforcement employees must be paid overtime compensation for time worked in the “gap.”
Conner v. Cleveland County: Fourth Circuit Recognizes Overtime Gap Time Claims Under FLSA
In Conner v. Cleveland County, N. Carolina, 22 F.4th 412 (4th Cir. 2022), the Fourth Circuit held that the overtime provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) allow claims for “overtime gap time.”
Virginia Overtime Wage Act: A Handy Guide to Overtime Protections for Virginia Employees
The Virginia Overtime Wage Act (“VOWA”) requires employers to pay covered employees overtime compensation. In some ways, the VOWA is similar to the overtime provisions of the federal Fair Labor Standards Act. In other ways, including the calculation of overtime rates for salaried employees, the availability of triple damages, and the time period for which damages can be recovered, VOWA is more powerful and beneficial to employees than the FLSA. For example, if the court finds that an employer...
United States v. Darby: Commerce Clause, Manufacturing, and the FLSA
In United States v. Darby, 312 U.S. 100, 61 S. Ct. 451 (1941), the Supreme Court held that Congress had power under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution to enact the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”). The Court held that the Commerce Clause permitted Congress, through the FLSA, to regulate the working conditions of employers whose manufacturing activities were purely intrastate, when the employer intended or expected at least some of its goods to eventually move in interstate commerce. The...
Garcia v. San Antonio Metro: Application of the FLSA to State and Local Governments
In Garcia v. San Antonio Metro. Transit Auth., 469 U.S. 528, 105 S. Ct. 1005 (1985), the Supreme Court held that Congress had power under the Commerce Clause to apply the Fair Labor Standards Act to a municipal transit authority. The case is important because it overruled a previous landmark decision and clarified that the FLSA’s federal minimum wage and overtime provisions can lawfully apply to state and local government employees.
Virginia Anti-Blacklisting Law and Tortious Interference Claims: Protections for Former Employees Seeking New Employment
Virginia’s Anti-Blacklisting Law, VA Code § 40.1-27, generally prohibits employers from willfully or maliciously preventing or attempting to prevent a former employee from obtaining new employment. While the statute does not describe a private cause of action, the conduct it prohibits could give rise to common law claims of tortious interference with contractual relationships or business expectancy.
Mitchell v. Kentucky Finance Co.: Overtime Protections for Loan Officers
In Mitchell v. Kentucky Finance Co., 359 U.S. 290 (1959) the Supreme Court held that the business of making personal loans to individuals does not constitute “sales of . . . services” by a “retail or service establishment,” within the meaning of the retail and service establishment exemption to the Fair Labor Standards Act. This is the case regardless of whether the company might be thought of in the financial industry as being engaged in “retail financing.” Mitchell is important because it h...
Federal Express v. Holowecki: EEOC Charge Defined
In Fed. Exp. Corp. v. Holowecki, 552 U.S. 389, 128 S. Ct. 1147 (2008), the Supreme Court held that for an employee’s filing with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to be deemed a “charge” under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, it must be reasonably construed as a request for the agency to take remedial action to protect the employee’s rights or otherwise settle a dispute between the employer and the employee.
The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA) requires t...
Virginia Pay Transparency Law: Protecting the Right of Virginia Employees to Discuss Pay Information
The Virginia Pay Transparency Law (“VPTL”), VA Code § 40.1–28.7:9, prohibits an employer from discharging or taking other retaliatory action against employees for discussing their pay or any other employees’ pay. The law is important because protecting employees’ right to discuss their compensation makes it easier for employees to negotiate for better pay and to discover possible violations of laws relating to employee compensation.
Protections
The VPTL provides that employers may not dischar...
Ex Parte Young: A Partial Way Around Sovereign Immunity
The Supreme Court’s decision in Ex Parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908), stands for the principle that sovereign immunity does not prevent people harmed by state agencies acting in violation of federal law from suing the officials in charge of the agencies in their individual capacity for injunctive relief. In the employment context, this principle is important because it allows the employee of a state agency that violates federal employment laws to sue the agency head in his or her individual ca...
Virginia Employment Records Law: Guaranteeing Employees the Right to Receive Copies of Pay Records
The Virginia Employment Records Law (“VERL”), VA Code § 8.01-413.1, requires employers to provide employees upon request with copies of all records reflecting the employee’s wages or salary during their employment, and certain other categories of records. The law is important because, inter alia, it gives employees the right to obtain information showing how they are paid and what kinds of deductions their employer is making from their pay. In some situations, obtaining these records may help...
Kimel v. Fla. Bd. of Regents: Sovereign Immunity and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act
In Kimel v. Fla. Bd. of Regents, 528 U.S. 62, 120 S. Ct. 631 (2000), the Supreme Court held that although the Age Discrimination in Employment Act contains a clear statement of Congress’ intent to abrogate the States’ sovereign immunity, that abrogation exceeded Congress’ authority under § 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment. Consequently, under Kimel, State employees are generally not able to sue their State employers for money damages arising from violations of the ADEA. State employees may have ...
North Carolina Equal Employment Practices Act: Anti-Discrimination Policy Protections for North Carolina Employees
The North Carolina Equal Employment Practices Act (NCEEPA) prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, national origin, religion, age, sex, or handicap.
The law is codified at N.C. Gen. Stat. Ann. §§ 143-422.1 to 143-422.3. The NCEEPA applies to employers who regularly employ 15 or more employees. While the statute does not provide a private cause of action, it can be the basis for a common law claim of wrongful discharge in violation of state public policy.
Covered Employers
Th...