New England Biz Law Update

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has voted 2-1 to rescind its 2024 enforcement guidance, which expanded interpretations of workplace protections for LGBTQ workers and individuals seeking reproductive care.

A federal judge has ruled that a former transportation employee may proceed to trial on a retaliation claim under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), even where the employer believed the employee had misused intermittent leave.

The National Labor Relations Board has issued its first published decision since regaining a quorum, resuming adjudicatory activity after a period of inactivity.

A California-based staffing agency has agreed to pay $185,000 and take other corrective actions to resolve a pregnancy discrimination lawsuit filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ordered the federal government to produce internal documents related to proposed workforce reductions, siding with labor unions seeking access to planning materials tied to potential layoffs.

A state Superior Court judge has ruled that an instructor at a for-profit commercial truck-driving school was not entitled to overtime pay under the state Wage Act, concluding that the employee qualified as an exempt teaching professional.

The Department of Homeland Security has issued a final rule fundamentally changing how H-1B cap-subject visas are selected.

A jury in Massachusetts has awarded the highest-ranking female state police officer $11 million on a discrimination claim that dates to her days as a trooper.

The federal government is preparing for a significant expansion of immigration enforcement in 2026, including increased workplace raids and expanded agency funding.

A Superior Court judge in Massachusetts has ruled that job applicants needed to show some form of tangible harm in order to proceed with putative class actions alleging that four national retailers violated state law requiring notice on job applications that it’s unlawful for employers to require lie detector tests.