Tag: pandemic

Employment-Based Immigration Updates for 2023

As we move deeper into the new year, the U.S. government continues to try to resolve the challenges facing the immigration system due to the disruptions of the COVID-19 pandemic and the resulting processing backlogs. These challenges may still continue, but new changes and updates have already taken effect—and more will likely come in 2023, impacting employers and the decisions they make with regard to their foreign national employees. Below are several updates the U.S. government has already released that impact employment-based immigration processes.

USCIS Proposed Fee Increases

On January 4, 2023, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) proposed changes to its fees for certain types of cases. The changes to the fees are dramatic increases to some employment-based visa types and are in an effort to make up for funding shortages that have impacted USCIS. Proposed filing fee increases for the following employment-based visa types include:

  • H-1B: $460 to $780
  • H-1B registration fee: $10 to $215
  • L-1: $460 to $1,385
  • O-1: $460 to $1,055
  • Adjustment of Status Application (I-485): $1,225 to $2,820

As we previously reported, the proposed rule—which is in the public comment phase—also includes a change to the existing premium processing timeline. The timeline would increase from fifteen calendar days to fifteen business days.

Continued Expansion of Premium Processing

On May 24, 2022, USCIS implemented a phased approach to expanded premium processing service. In 2022, premium processing was expanded to I-140 petitions, and on January 30, 2023, premium processing will be available to all EB-1C multinational executive and manager and EB-2 National Interest Waiver petitions. The January 30 expansion will include new filings as well as upgrades on pending petitions.

USCIS’s next phase of premium processing expansion will apply to the following applications:

  • Form I-539, Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status
  • Form I-765, Application for Employment Authorization

Foreign National Employees and RIFs

With changes in the U.S. economy and world markets, employers may start conducting reductions in force (RIF) to adjust to new budget goals. RIFs have the potential to impact foreign national employees. As we discussed in a recent podcast, employers may want to consider the potential impact of restructurings on workers who are in nonimmigrant status, those who are in the permanent residency process, and students working in F-1 status.

Equal Pay Transparency Laws

An increasing number of states and local jurisdictions—such as California, Colorado, Connecticut, New York State, New York City, Rhode Island, and Washington—have implemented equal pay transparency (EPT) laws that now require employers to make additional disclosures regarding offered salaries and/or benefits on job requisitions and postings. This will have a significant impact on the PERM process for green card applications in these jurisdictions by mandating employers list a salary or salary range on PERM and non-PERM recruitment materials. EPT laws vary across jurisdictions as to which types of postings or recruitment efforts will require additional information.

Nonimmigrant Visa Interview Waivers Extended Until December 31, 2023

In an effort to reduce visa wait times and processing backlogs at U.S. consulates, the U.S. Department of State has extended the authority of consular officers to waive in-person interviews for certain nonimmigrant categories through December 31, 2023.

Fiscal Year 2024 H-1B Cap Preparation

With the annual H-1B lottery just two months away, employers may want to consider the foreign national employees they plan to sponsor and enter into this year’s upcoming H-1B cap or quota process. The process will start with the initial registration period, which typically opens at the beginning of March and lasts for a minimum of fourteen calendar days each fiscal year (FY). USCIS will soon announce details about the FY 2024 H-1B registration period. If enough registrations are submitted, USCIS will conduct a random selection of the registration entries to determine who will be eligible to file H-1B petitions. If selected, the employers will have ninety days to file the H-1B petitions, starting April 1. So far, there have not been any changes in this process for this upcoming cycle.

Article By Awanti A. Damle of Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C.

For more immigration legal news, click here to visit the National Law Review.

© 2023, Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C., All Rights Reserved.

Privacy Rights in a Remote Work World: Can My Employer Monitor My Activity?

The rise in remote work has brought with it a rise in employee monitoring.  Between 2019 and 2021, the percentage of employees working primarily from home tripled.  As “productivity paranoia” crept in, employers steadily adopted employee surveillance technologies.  This has raised questions about the legal and ethical implications of enhanced monitoring, in some cases prompting proposed legislation or the expanded use of laws already on the books.

Employee monitoring is nothing new.  Employers have long used supervisors and timeclock programs, among other systems, to monitor employee activity.  What is new, however, is the proliferation of sophisticated monitoring technologies—as well as the expanding number and variety of companies that are employing them.

 While surveillance was once largely confined to lower-wage industries, white-collar employers are increasingly using surveillance technologies to track their employees’ activity and productivity.  Since the COVID-19 pandemic started in March 2020, one in three medium-to-large companies has adopted some form of employee monitoring, with the total fraction of employers using surveillance technologies closer to two in three.  Workers who are now subject to monitoring technologies include doctors, lawyers, academics, and even hospice chaplains.  Employee monitoring technologies can track a range of information, including:

  • Internet use (e.g., which websites and apps an employee has visited and for how long);

  • How long a computer sits idle;

  • How many keystrokes an employee types per hour;

  • Emails that are sent or received from a work or personal email address (if the employee is logged into a personal account on a work computer);

  • Screenshots of a computer’s display; and

  • Webcam photos of the employee throughout the day.

These new technologies, coupled with the shift to remote work, have blurred the line between the professional and the personal, the public and the private.  In the face of increased monitoring, this blog explores federal and state privacy regulations and protections for employees.

What are the legal limitations on employee monitoring?

 There are two primary sources of restrictions on employee monitoring: (1) the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 (ECPA), 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510 et seq.; and (2) common-law protections against invasions of privacy.  The ECPA is the only federal law that regulates the monitoring of electronic communications in the workplace.  It extends the Federal Wiretap Act’s prohibition on the unauthorized interception of communications, which was initially limited to oral and wire communications, to cover electronic communications like email.  As relevant here, the ECPA contains two major exceptions.  The first exception, known as the business purpose exception, allows employers to monitor employee communications if they can show that there is a legitimate business purpose for doing so.  The second exception, known as the consent exception, permits employers to monitor employee communications so long as they have consent to do so.  Notably, this exception is not limited to business communications, allowing employers to monitor employees’ personal communications if they have the requisite consent.  Together, the business purpose and consent exceptions significantly limit the force of the ECPA, such that, standing alone, it permits most forms of employee monitoring.

In addition to the ECPA’s limited protections from surveillance, however, some states have adopted additional protections of employee privacy.  Several state constitutions, including those of California, South Carolina, Florida, and Louisiana, guarantee citizens a right to privacy.  While these provisions do not directly regulate employers’ activity, they may bolster employees’ claims to an expectation of privacy.  Other states have enacted legislation that limits an employer’s ability to monitor employees’ social media accounts.  Virginia, for example, prohibits employers from requiring employees to disclose their social media usernames or passwords.  And a few states have enacted laws to bolster employees’ access to their data.  For example, the California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA), which comes into full effect on January 1, 2023, and replaces the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), will provide employees with the right to access, delete, or opt-out of the sale of their personal information, including data collected through employee monitoring programs.  Employees will also have the right to know where, when, and how employers are using their data.  The CPRA’s protections are limited, however.  Employers will still be able to use surveillance technologies, and to make employment decisions based on the data these technologies gather.

Finally, several states require employers to provide notice to employees before monitoring or intercepting electronic communications.  New York recently adopted a law,  Senate Bill (SB) S2628, that requires all private-sector employers to provide notice of any electronic monitoring to employees (1) upon hiring, via written or electronic employee acknowledgment; and (2) in general, in a “conspicuous place” in the workplace viewable to all employees.  The new law is aimed at the forms of monitoring that have proliferated since the shift to remote work, and covers surveillance technologies that target the activities or communications of individual employees.  Delaware and Connecticut also have privacy laws that predate SB S2628.  Delaware requires notice to employees upon hire that they will be monitored, but does not require notice within the workplace.  Meanwhile, Connecticut requires notice of monitoring to be conspicuously displayed in the workplace but does not require written notice to employees upon hire.  Accordingly, in many states, employee privacy protections exceed the minimum standard of the ECPA, though they still are not robust.

How does employee monitoring intersect with other legal rights?

Other legal protections further limit employee monitoring.

First, in at least some jurisdictions, employees who access personal emails on their work computer, or conduct other business that would be protected under attorney-client privilege, maintain their right to privacy for those communications.  In Stengart v. Loving Care Agency, Inc., 408 N.J. Super. 54 (App. Div. 2009), the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, considered a case in which an employee had accessed her personal email account on her employer’s computer and exchanged emails from that account with her attorney regarding a possible employment case against her employer.  The employer, who had installed an employee monitoring program, was able to access and read the employee’s emails.  The Court held that the employee still had a reasonable expectation of privacy and that sending and receiving emails on a company-issued laptop did not waive the attorney-client privilege.  The Court thus required the employer to turn over all emails between the employee and her attorney that were in its possession and directed the employer to delete all of these emails from its hard drives.  Moving forward, the Court instructed that, while “an employer may trespass to some degree into an employee’s privacy when buttressed by a legitimate business interest,” such a business interest held “little force . . . when offered as the basis for an intrusion into communications otherwise shielded by the attorney-client privilege.”  Stengart, 408 N.J. Super. at 74.

Second, employee monitoring can run afoul of protections related to union and other concerted activity.  The General Counsel for the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) recently announced a plan to curtail workplace surveillance technologies.  Existing law prohibits employers from using surveillance technologies to monitor or record union activity, such as by recording employees engaged in picketing, or otherwise interfering with employees’ rights to engage in concerted activity.  The General Counsel’s plan outlines a new, formal framework for analyzing whether employee monitoring interferes with union or concerted activity.  Under this framework, an employer presumptively violates Section 7 or Section 8 of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) where their “surveillance and management practices, viewed as a whole, would tend to interfere with or prevent a reasonable employee from engaging in” protected activities.  Examples of technologies that are presumptively violative include key loggers, webcam photos, and audio recordings.

Do I have a claim against my employer?

While federal and state restrictions on employee monitoring are limited, you may have a legal claim against your employer if its monitoring is overly intrusive or it mishandles your personal data.  First, an invasion-of-privacy claim, for the tort of intrusion upon seclusion, could exist if your employer monitors your activity in a way that would be highly offensive to a reasonable person, such as by accessing your work laptop’s webcam or internal microphone and listening in on private affairs in your home.  Second, you may have a claim against your employer for violating its legal duty to protect your personal information if data it collects in the course of monitoring your work activity is compromised.  In Dittman v. UPMC, 196 A.3d 1036 (Pa. 2018), employees at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center and UPMC McKeesport (collectively, UPMC) filed a class-action complaint alleging that UPMC breached its legal duty of reasonable care when it failed to protect employees’ data, which was stolen from UPMC computers.  The Pennsylvania Supreme Court found for the plaintiffs, holding that employers have an affirmative duty to protect the personal information of their employees.  Because the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s holding was grounded in tort principles that are recognized by many states (i.e., duty of care and negligence), it may pave a path for future cases in other jurisdictions.  Third, if any medical information is accessed and improperly used by your employer, you may have a claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act, which requires that employers keep all employee medical information confidential and separate from all other personnel information.  See 42 U.S.C. § 12112(d)(3)(B)-(C), (4)(B)-(C).

Conclusion

Employees are monitored more consistently and in more ways than ever before. By and large, employee monitoring is legal.  Employers can monitor your keystrokes, emails, and internet activity, among other metrics.  While federal regulation of employee monitoring is limited, some states offer additional protections of employee privacy.  Most notably, employers are increasingly required to inform employees that their activity will be monitored.  Moreover, other legal rights, such as the right to engage in concerted activity and to have your medical information kept confidential, provide checks on employee surveillance.  As employee monitoring becomes more commonplace, restrictions on surveillance technologies and avenues for legal recourse may also grow.

Article By Bonnie Henry of Katz Banks Kumin LLP

For more labor and employment legal news, click here to visit the National Law Review.

Katz Banks Kumin LLP Copyright ©

Twelve Tips for Effective In-Person Networking in the Post-Pandemic World

I recently got on my first flight since the pandemic. I had been avoiding travel and conferences for many reasons, but it’s time to stop hiding at home and behind my computer screen.

Over the next few weeks I am speaking at several lawyer retreats and industry conferences – I’m excited but nervous.

I feel like a fish out of water (I accidentally let my TSA pre-check expire as well as my passport during Covid). It’s also the first time I’m leaving my pandemic puppies (I think it’s more traumatic for me than them).

I’m looking forward to seeing familiar faces and meeting new ones, and getting to know my clients in a setting other than Zoom because human connections are important and powerful.

In-person networking is essential – it is the secret sauce to building long-term and meaningful relationships. Those relationships can lead to opportunities of all kinds.

Even as an extroverted extrovert, I’m a bit rusty on networking.

I have been doing countless presentations to a computer screen since March 2020 and so being able to see and interact with real people is a much welcome change. A return to “normalcy.”

But after years of being an “expert” network, I’m not actually sure what to do when I actually see people again in a profesional group setting.

Do I hug? (I’m Italian, we like to hug) Shake hands? Fist bump? Just smile and nod? So glad we aren’t bathing in hand sanitizer anymore or cloroxing everything with which we come in touch.

Many of us are in the same position after the past few years, and we don’t feel like the same person we used to be. But that’s okay. Let’s collectively give ourselves a break (and some grace). We are all in the same boat – together.

Here are 12 tips for effective in-person networking I plan to use:

  1. Ask people about themselves more then I talk about myself.
  2. Practice active listening.
  3. Say their names a few times when talking to them – it helps me remember them and makes people like you more.
  4. Write notes after each meaningful conversation.
  5. Exit conversations gracefully.
  6. Follow up and connect on LinkedIn with new and renewed contacts.
  7. Put my LinkedIn QR code on my iPhone home screen to facilitate easy networking. Here’s how.
  8. Add new contacts to my CRM.
  9. Immerse myself in the programming. I am not going to check my email every second or do unnecessary work.
  10. Write a key takeaways blog and LinkedIn post from the sessions I enjoyed and tag the speakers.
  11. Create an email OOO message that supports my brand and business (see example from Paula Edgar).
  12. Have an intimate dinner with my clients/colleagues to get to know them better.

Do you have any tips for in-person networking in the post-pandemic environment?

Article By Stefanie M. Marrone of Stefanie Marrone Consulting

For more legal marketing and business of law news, click here to visit the National Law Review.

Copyright © 2022, Stefanie M. Marrone. All Rights Reserved.

The Cost of Bicycle Accidents: Why Bike Safety Pays Off

Along with the COVID-19 pandemic’s stay-at-home orders and a worldwide pause on travel plans, 2020 marked the onset of another phenomenon: a boom in bicycle riding. Bicycles gave people a sense of exploration and adventure during this difficult time.

This rise in cyclists comes with some sobering statistics, including a 16% rise in preventable deaths and a 5% increase in non-fatal injuries. Of the 1,260 bicyclist deaths reported in 2020, 806 of those directly involved motor vehicles. These injuries come at a significant expense: the over 13,000 bicycle injuries each year cost more than $23 billion in the United States.

But no one wants to experience a bicycle accident or the long-term consequences of one. Here’s what you need to know about bicycle safety to protect you or your loved ones while exploring the world on two wheels.

Bike accident risk factors

While the rise in bike accidents and their associated medical costs is primarily due to the increased numbers of bicyclists, there are risk factors that can affect specific individuals more than others. Common bike accident risk factors include:

Age

While adolescents, teens, and young adults make up nearly one-third of all cycling injuries treated in emergency departments, bicycle death rates are highest in adults between the ages of 55-69.

Sex

Compared to female cyclists, the death and injury rates of males are 6 and 5 times higher, respectively.

Traffic

Most cycling accidents occur in urban areas, with 64% of deaths occurring away from intersections and 27% occurring at intersections.

Alcohol

Nearly one-third of bicycling fatalities involved alcohol, either from the motor vehicle driver or the cyclist.

Bike accident cost breakdown

Fatal and non-fatal alike, cycling accidents cost the US billions each year. In addition to the injuries and fatalities which occur as a result of road accidents, there are personal costs to account for as well:

  • Medical bills

  • Recovery/rehabilitation costs

  • Loss of wages due to missing work

  • Possible changes to earning potential

  • Possible funeral and burial expenses

In terms of costs, the individual cost of a serious adult bicycle accident has grown from $52,495—medical bills, missed work, loss of quality of life—to $77,308. Today, the number would be even higher.

Of course, that’s not to mention the emotional burden of a cycling accident—especially if a cycling accident results in a long-term injury or the loss of a loved one.

That’s why prioritizing bike safety is so important. To reduce these costs, communities need to create better conditions for cycling, including safer cycling infrastructure (cycling tracks, improved street lighting) and widespread education about safe cycling practices.

Bicycle safety measures at the state level

Personal safety while cycling is critical, but state legislators in New Jersey have been working to improve safety measures for cyclists as well.

The Safe Passing Law, which was put on the books in August of 2021, requires drivers to leave at least four feet of space between vehicles and anyone sharing the road, whether on foot or by bicycle. A violation of these rules can result in a $500 fine and two motor vehicle points if bodily harm is caused.

The Division of Highway Safety and the Department of Transportation has been running a social media campaign to spread awareness about the law, an effort that included a $78,342 grant to the New Jersey Bike & Walk Coalition to educate the public on the law and the community impacts of bicycle and pedestrian safety.

Improving your bicycling safety

It’s essential to take the necessary steps to promote safety—for yourself and for others who share the road. While bicycle safety courses and education are essential, having safe bicycles and gear should also be part of the equation.

Make sure to budget for safety

Appropriate bicycling kits, from bare necessities to high-end gear, can cost anywhere from $150 to $1,000; costs can vary depending on the type of riding you do, the features you prioritize, and your budget.

Helmets, for example, may cost as little as $25 or as much as $500. Active lighting—white front lights, red rear lights, reflective tape, gear, and accessories—will typically cost a minimum of $45. Pumps, multi-tools, and patch kits can cost between $10-30 or more. Of course, investing in bright, visible clothing to wear while riding is also a good idea.

Cyclists should also regularly maintain their bicycles to keep them in good order. Many cyclists perform routine maintenance on their bikes themselves, seeking assistance from bike shops for parts and guidance. This can run between $300-500 a year in expenses.

While the costs of your bike’s features and accessories can add up, keep in mind that the investment is well worth it, as the cost of getting into an accident can be much higher.

Article By Domenic B. Sanginiti, Jr. of Stark & Stark

For more personal injury legal news, click here to visit the National Law Review.

COPYRIGHT © 2022, STARK & STARK

Large Corporate Bankruptcy Filings Continue to Decrease through First Half of 2022

Most industry groups saw bankruptcy filings decline from mid-2020 pandemic highs.

New York—Following the spike in large corporate bankruptcy filings triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic, filings in 2021 and the first half of 2022 fell to levels below historical averages, according to a Cornerstone Research report released today.

The report, Trends in Large Corporate Bankruptcy and Financial Distress—Midyear 2022 Update, examines trends in Chapter 7 and Chapter 11 bankruptcy filings by companies with assets of $100 million or higher. It finds that 70 large companies filed for bankruptcy in 2021, down significantly from 155 in 2020 and below the annual average of 78 filings since 2005. In the first half of 2022, only 20 large companies filed for bankruptcy, compared to midyear totals of 43 in 1H 2021 and 89 in 1H 2020. The 20 bankruptcies in 1H 2022 were the lowest midyear total since the second half of 2014.

“U.S. government stimulus programs, low borrowing rates, and high debt forbearance helped disrupt predictions of continued growth in the number of bankruptcy filings,” said Nick Yavorsky, a report coauthor and Cornerstone Research principal. “Looking ahead, however, there are some concerns that increased corporate debt levels, rising interest rates and inflation, and a potential global recession may contribute to an increase in bankruptcy filings.”

In 2021, there were 20 “mega bankruptcies”—bankruptcy filings among companies with over $1 billion in reported assets—a substantial decline from the 60 mega bankruptcy filings in 2020. The first half of 2022 saw four Chapter 11 mega bankruptcy filings, compared to nine in the first half of 2021 and at a pace significantly lower than the annual average of 22 filings in 2005–2021.

Most industry groups saw bankruptcy filings decrease in 2021 and the first half of 2022, including those industries with the highest number of filings following the pandemic’s onset: Mining, Oil, and Gas; Retail Trade; Manufacturing; and Services.

Read the full report here.

Article By Allie Schwartz, Joseph B. “J.B.” Doyle, Nicholas D. Yavorsky, and Diego Vega San Martin of Cornerstone Research

For more bankruptcy legal news, click here to visit the National Law Review.

Copyright ©2022 Cornerstone Research

DHS May Make Form I-9 Flexibility a Fixture

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced it is considering changes to the Form I-9 documentation examination procedures. As human resources teams know, the remote workplace that became common during the COVID-19 pandemic made an already complicated I-9 process a logistical nightmare. With the U.S. government’s declaration of a national emergency due to the COVID-19 pandemic, DHS and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) announced certain flexibilities in March 2020 that suspended the requirement of in-person review of I-9 documents when a company was operating remotely due to COVID-19. Those flexibilities have been extended numerous times and are currently set to expire Oct. 31, 2022.

While DHS says it is considering making these temporary flexibilities permanent, the Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) published last month does not seek to do so. Instead, the NPRM seeks to validate the authority of the DHS secretary to enact flexibilities, offer alternative options, and/or implement a pilot program to evaluate existing and additional alternative I-9 procedures for some or all employers. DHS recognizes that more and more employers are utilizing telework and remote work for their employees and that requiring in-person review of I-9 documents is no longer consistent with work patterns of many businesses.

Some of the more notable possible changes to the I-9 process described in the NPRM include requiring employers to note on the Form I-9 which of the alternative procedures they used; requiring employers to retain copies of I-9 documents; requiring online training on fraudulent document and/or anti-discrimination training for employers who wish to utilize the alternative procedures; and limiting eligibility to use the alternative procedures to employers that utilize E-Verify, the government’s online employment verification system.

Comments to the NPRM are due on or before Oct. 17, 2022.

Article By Rebecca B. Schechter of Greenberg Traurig, LLP

For more immigration legal news, click here to visit the National Law Review.

©2022 Greenberg Traurig, LLP. All rights reserved.

Legal News Reach Episode 4: The Perfect Storm: Law Firm Marketing & Business Development Budgeting with Beth Cuzzone, Global Practice Leader of Intapp

Welcome to Season 2, Episode 4 of Legal News Reach! National Law Review Managing Director Jennifer Schaller is joined by Beth Cuzzone, Global Practice Leader of Intapp. Together, they discuss the best budgeting strategies for legal marketing departments as firms emerge from the pandemic with a new set of priorities and perspectives.

We’ve included a transcript of the conversation below, transcribed by artificial intelligence. The transcript has been lightly edited for clarity and readability.

Jennifer Schaller

This is Jennifer Schaller, and I’m the Managing Director of the National Law Review. We’ll be speaking with Beth Cuzzone, who’s the Global Practice Leader of Intapp. Beth, can you tell us a little bit about your background and what you do at Intapp?

Beth Cuzzone

Thank you for asking, Jennifer. I think it’s an important table-setting question. So I recently joined Intapp in 2022. It’s a global technology firm, and it partners with investors and advisors to help them run their businesses. And it basically follows those companies through the lifecycle of their companies, whether it’s intake or relationship management, or deal management, or billing or marketing or risk, and so many other operational functions. But my role Intapp sits in the marketing and business development corner of those companies. So as a Global Practice Leader, I’m responsible for working with a team of subject matter experts who help clients align their strategic priorities with our solutions. It’s been an interesting and challenging shift, because I spent more than 30 years of my career in the very types of companies that Intapp now helps. So it’s been an interesting and exciting and challenging change all at once. And I think it also gives me a unique lens into what we’re going to be diving into today.

Jennifer Schaller

Okay, wow, it sounds like a spot-on match here we have today. So let’s dig into it. We’re talking about law firm budgets. So for this upcoming budget cycle, for firms who are either almost done with it, or in the process, or close to wrapping it up. What’s different this year than in previous years in law firm marketing and business development departments?

Beth Cuzzone

In one word, everything. If we take a step back and look at the easy formula that law firms have used traditionally when creating their budgets, there hasn’t been a lot of secret sauce. In its simplest form, and I am oversimplifying it for illustrative purposes, but in its simplest form, law firms for years and years and years, and year over year, would take into consideration their former budget number and give it an increase that aligned with the firm’s increase in their revenue for that year. And then the real work would begin on saying, Okay, we’re going to give ourselves a 2 or 3% increase, because we increased our revenue by 8%. So we’re going to take some slice of that, and we’re going to increase what we did last year, and then they would reallocate that number. And so if it was my budget was $1,000 last year, and you know, now I’m going to increase it by 3%, it’s going to be $1,300. And now let me just play around with the line items and see where we want to spend a little more, where we want to spend a little less. Given the years that we’ve had coming up to the 2023 budget season, we had 2020, when the pandemic hit, we had 2021, where we were still experiencing the effects of that. And then in 2022 as people tried to move back into some normalcy of spend market, you know, marketing, outreach, awareness, credibility, relationships, going back into the office, that sort of thing, the budgets are a little bit all over the place. So to answer your question, why is this coming year’s budget different? It’s because you don’t have last year’s budget that you get to just reset.

The interesting thing is that I think it actually is going to provide opportunities to relook at the way you think of your budget and think a little bit about very specific line items. You know, I do think one of the places that people are going to spend a lot of time thinking about is digital marketing. And, you know, a question I had for you is, have you seen an uptick in the digital marketing spend from law firms, where we were pre-pandemic, to pandemic to where people are moving towards?

Jennifer Schaller

That’s kind of a multi-layered question. I mean, over the last five years, there’s obviously been a switch to more digital. There’s a couple of different things going on in the larger digital advertising industry. Advertising rates right now as a whole are pretty suppressed digitally. So that’s impacting us a little bit, just because the baseline is down. But if you’re in a specific niche, like the National Law Review, where you know, we very much have the traffic and the audience, there’s always going to be a demand for it. What’s going to be super interesting to see is when cookies go away. People keep talking about that, because that’s going to make the content on the website far more relevant, as opposed to having retargeting ads and things like that. But the date keeps changing on that. So, you know, we’ll let you know when we know. And related to publishing end of it, there’s been a bit of a sea change on that. There always was sort of a pushback or a stigma somewhat attached to pay-for-play publishing. But a little bit of a difference with that is, over time, most marketing professionals, especially in legal, understand that there’s costs involved in running a quality publication, if you want to have analytics, if you want to have a responsive staff who’s around to make edits, that you have to pay for that, and that, you know, if you don’t have money coming in from subscriptions, if you’re a no login website, that there’s going to be cost. So there’s been a bit of a change there. There’s more receptiveness to it. And I think maybe because law firms themselves understand what it takes to publish, they’re a little more forgiving, and understanding that we have costs too, if that makes any sense.

Beth Cuzzone

It makes complete sense. It makes complete sense. And again, there’s no direct answer to some of these complicated questions that we’re asking each other today about where people are spending and where it’s going versus where it’s been when we’ve had this pause on so many levels. And like you said, I also just think that the lens of the marketing and business development departments and law firms are really starting to appreciate that looking at digital assets as a way to create awareness and credibility is going to be a leader in their budget.

Jennifer Schaller

Well, yes, especially since events have changed and gone away. And a lot of sponsorships have changed. And given that pandemic ripple effect of live events versus sponsoring tables at events, which used to be a part of legal marketing department spends, what’s becoming more the standard for law firm, legal marketing department and business development spend, is it changed? Is it reallocating? How is that working?

Beth Cuzzone

That’s a great question. So typically–I heard somebody say once, law firms are like snowflakes, everyone is different. And I know that when I look at industry statistics that talks about the swing of spend, that has to do with you know, the percentage of revenue of law firms, that it goes anywhere from 2 or 3% to 18, 19, 20%. And the reason that they have that swing is because in some marketing and business development department budgets, they include personnel when others don’t, okay, or in some marketing and business development, department budgets, it’s all marketing, whether it’s for the HR department, or legal recruiting, or the firm, and others. Those are each very separate departments and separate budgets. So there is this huge spread across the industry. But I think for most firms, we’re going to find that there’s that 3.5 or 4% to 8% budget target of revenue. And that’s kind of where people settle in. There are outliers on both sides. And interestingly, there’s often some surprises. I find that sometimes some of the smaller, mid-sized firms have larger percentage budgets. But I think that’s because they can’t enjoy the scales of economy that larger firms can. If you’re looking at your budget, and we can talk about this in a little bit, you know, in 2020 when the pandemic started, all discretionary budget items were removed from law firms, whether it was in marketing and business development or not. So it was like, “Unless we’re contractually obligated to pay something, we’re taking it off the table.” And so now firms are getting that opportunity to rebuild it. And again, that approach and that budgeting exercise is a real opportunity for these firms to say, “What haven’t we been asking ourselves?” Or, “What haven’t we done that we’ve wanted to? What’s not in our budget? What should be or what are the opportunities out there in terms of places or people or technology or intersections that we’ve never tried before?” So I think there’s some of those questions that are happening, too.

Jennifer Schaller

Yeah, I think if anything, this is just helpful to know, to have legal marketers or even law firm administrators, or management know how to ask questions about legal marketing budgets, that there is such a wide range, but the wide range prompts people to ask the question, “What’s in that figure and what’s not?”  I’ve never really had it broken down that well before. So thank you for taking the time to spell that out. Because it’s not spelled out a lot of different places. Many people will appreciate that.

When you’re talking about law firm marketing budgets, what’s the difference between acquisition marketing and retention marketing and preparing budgets? Should law firms dedicate more resources to one or the other? Or is it some sort of blend?

Beth Cuzzone

That is a very forward-thinking question that you’re laying out there. Because I think that law firms basically had two types of buckets, if you will: they thought of it as awareness and credibility building, or relationship building, it was one of the two. And so they had some things around awareness and credibility, we talked a little bit about it earlier, you know, it’s that one to many, the website, you know, the content, the newsletters, the big events, that sort of thing. And then the relationships are kind of those one-on-ones. It’s the spending time going out and sitting down with a prospective client to learn something, or having an entertainment budget or doing some small roundtables with thought leadership, or sitting down with different decision makers at a particular client site so that you’re staying close to them. And it was a little bit all over the place. And the shift that I’m starting to see happen is that law firms are starting to break down their budgets into exactly what you said: acquisition marketing, which is, “How are we getting new clients?” versus retention marketing, which is, “how are we keeping and growing the clients that we have, or the brands that we have, or the relationships that we have?” And by doing that, they’re also starting to do account-based marketing. And they’re able to put their budgets together and say, “We’re going to spend 70, or 60, or 80% of our budget on our existing relationships, because we know that it costs six to eight time more money, resources, people budgets to get a new client than it does to keep and grow an existing one. So when you look at the scale of acquisition versus retention, retention is going to get that bigger budget. And then the acquisition is going to have a smaller wallet share of the overall budget. But within that big budget, you’re going to start that retention budget, you’re going to start to see that being broken down a little bit by account-based marketing as therefore account based budgeting. Again, this is a little bit around the corner. And this is I think what firms are going to be dealing with over the next five years of exactly being able to measure their return on objectives or their return on investments and where their money is really being spent. Because they’re going to be tying it down to very specific objectives and very specific strategies, if you will.

Jennifer Schaller

Okay, so what would be some of the areas that there would be an overlap, like between acquisition and retention marketing, would that fall in the digital area? Or where would that be?

Beth Cuzzone

That’s a perfect example, please look at what we’re talking about like a Venn diagram, right, you’ve got your acquisition, you’ve got your retention and then there’s the place where they overlay. Digital assets are a perfect example that fall into both. It’s helping you in the marketplace. And it’s helping you find your next big relationships and clients and referral sources. And those are the same assets that you can use to add value and stay close to some of your existing relationships, places where they start to separate a little bit, again, is really by account or by client, client-based marketing versus account-based marketing. And so you might have a firm where you say, we’re going to spend a lot of our travel and entertainment budget on going to each one of their offices and doing junior executive training. So that we’re aligning ourselves with the next generation of decision makers, and that’s how we want to spend our money and our time and our budget and our resources and our people on that particular client this year, sort of thing. So it all depends, again, on the strategy. And it also depends a little bit on the firm.

Jennifer Schaller

Yeah, would it vary by practice group, or just like, if you had a firm that was, you know, just intellectual property law based, would there be differences in the ratio or the mix or network?

Beth Cuzzone

That’s a great question. So there are some firms and also practice areas where there’s annuity streams, if you will, right. There’s just an ongoing, “We represent this particular finance institution on all of these sorts of loans. And, you know, we do 5, 10, 15 a year for them.” Think about if you were actually a litigator, and you were representing financial institutions where you didn’t know how many you were going to have in a year or whether you were not going to have any for two years and how they think of you and they call us when it’s about the company or they don’t call us when it’s about the company so you have to again, look at the firm, its strategy, the cadence of those open matters, the cadence of when they’re being asked to help clients and then try to align your budget and the activities in your budget around those very objectives. Does that make sense?

Jennifer Schaller

Yeah, it does. A lot of what you’re breaking down is really helpful because people throw numbers out there, but they don’t go into the details of what moves the numbers up or down, like your example of depending on if the law firm is including the expenses for HR, or including the salaries of the marketing department in there, that should make a big difference. And nobody really spells that out. So that was very helpful.

Beth Cuzzone

What kinds of trends are you seeing…there’s this nuance that’s happening now Jennifer, where there was a period of time “back in the day” where all law firms took out one-page ads in some of the biggest business-to-business publications and journals, or like yours, very, very niche, industry-specific news-related channels. And it was “we want to be top of mind” with whoever the reader is, whether it’s our peers, whether it’s our competition, whether it’s a referral source, whether it’s a potential client, whether it’s somebody on the other side of the table, and over time, that awareness campaign started to move into that content campaign. And I’d really be interested to see how are law firms maintaining that mindshare in the marketplace? What are you seeing?

Jennifer Schaller

Some big change from print, and what’s really changed–COVID was sort of terrible for the world, but in a lot of ways good for law firms and legal publishing. Because there were so many rapid developments of a legal or administrative or regulatory nature going on, there was just a lot of content to be written on and a lot of people looking for that content. So there was inherently a lot of traffic just being driven by COVID and all the related changes to it. Now that that’s leveled out a little bit, what we’re seeing from law firms is when they do their informative writing, meeting, talking about cases that happened and why that’s important to a particular industry, or new regulations that are on the horizon, what’s a little bit different is they’re starting to impose–not impose, but impart–their personality a little bit more. We’re seeing more content come in where it talks about people’s journey in the legal profession, how they balance working from home or transitioning out of working from home in a little bit more with the content. So before there was very little of that. I mean, there was some. It’s pretty prevalent now where we’ll see many law firms just have entire blogs and podcasts and a whole kind of vertical dedicated to life balance, people’s career paths, and things like that, which is a bit different than what we’ve seen before. I think it provides a good opportunity for law firms to tease out their competitive differences just by letting people know who they are, because ultimately, with law firms, they’re buying the person and their knowledge and their background. And this is kind of a more forward way of doing it than what’s been done in the past.

Beth Cuzzone

You know, it’s so interesting to hear you say that. I don’t think I really put such a fine point on it until you just mentioned it. All law firms do the same thing. For the most part, a general practice firm does the same thing as the next general practice, you know, an IP boutique does the same thing as the next IP. But how you do it, who you do it with and the culture is what your differentiator is. And you’re right, as I’m thinking a little bit about the sorts of information that I’m seeing, either the types of information or the personality in which people are writing, it really is giving firms a way to showcase their culture and who they are and their differentiator as opposed to all sounding like really smart law firms.

Jennifer Schaller

It’s that and I think it’s a little bit recruiting as well. I mean, the whole world has experienced quite a bit of turnover. Law firms have always had more turnover than other industries. So we’d have some stuff coming in where folks are interviewing their summer associates. And they’re doing that on a couple different levels. I think it plays to people who may be interested to know how a person got a summer associate position at an Am law firm, but also, you know, it’s a big hug to that person, and it shows in a recruiting sense that that law firm really cares about folks at all levels of the organization. We wouldn’t have seen that 10 years ago, so that’s just really different.

Okay, so let’s get into the fun part: budgeting tips! You’ve been doing budgets for years, you work with an organization that helps law firms kind of balance competing things for their attention and help tease out what’s probably the best bet for the firm. Do you have a few tips to share with our readers, or our readers and our listeners today, concerning law firm budgets, what to include what to not get pushed back on?

Beth Cuzzone

Yes, I think that there are a few best practices out there that law firm marketing and business development departments want to be thinking about as they’re either negotiating their budgets with firm management, or if they’re actually putting it together. We talked a little bit about the fact that historically firms have used the previous year and that budget number is a benchmark. Ironically, in 2022 law firm marketing and business development budgets increased by more than 100%. And again, it’s because in 2020, and 2021, they were decimated, it was the place where there was the most discretion in the budget, there were things like they weren’t going to be doing sponsorships, they weren’t going to be holding webinars, they weren’t going to be traveling to see clients or things–like take it all out. So then when we started to move towards this normalcy of, “let’s get back to business in 2022”, with a kinder, gentler, more softer approach, they had to increase their budgets by more than 100%. So the first thing I would say is, do not prepare your 2023 budget based on your 2022 budget, because you’re going to show that there’s already been 100% increase, and there will probably be very little wiggle room. I would also scrap 2020 and 2021. So I think one of my tips or best practices is, use 2019 as your benchmark, not 2021 or 22. For the reasons we’ve just talked about.

The other thing, you just mentioned this in the way you asked the question, is that there is a very complex ecosystem in law firms, and the marketing and business development budget is one of many competing priorities. And I think understanding that budgeting is a long-term game, not one you win every year. And so what I’m trying to say is, take a panoramic view of where the firm is, what they’re trying to accomplish, what some of their major goals are for the next year or two, look left and look right at what other operating department budgets are going to be impacted by that, and prepare your budget within the context of what’s happening. So don’t ask for the greatest budget increase among every operations department, every year. There becomes a fatigue, where it’s like, “Nope, just give them the 2%, we’re not going to listen to why they deserve more every year, year over year than every other department.” So I think walking in and being able to communicate, “We understand that lateral growth is one of our top strategic priorities, and that you’re going to be spending a lot of our budget on legal recruiting. So this year, I’ve put in some particular items and activities that will support legal recruiting, and I’ve moved my budget request from a 6% increase to a 2% increase.” And again, you can negotiate two or three years in advance, then say, “I just ask that when we’re looking at my budget in two years, or in three years that we appreciate that I’m asking for a smaller increase this year, given where we are, what we’re doing.” You know, it also goes a long way when there’s been a down year.

So, so far we’ve said, use 2019 as your benchmark, don’t ask for the greatest budget increase among every operations department every year, try to negotiate for two or three years in advance at your firm, but also negotiate two or three years in advance with your partners or vendors, depending on what you call them. You know, to be able to say, “Listen, we want to do this. And we can’t be all-in this year because our budget isn’t going to allow us, but can we negotiate an 18-month relationship with you and spread it over a 24-month period?” Negotiate a little bit! These are companies that want to partner with you. I also think it never hurts to ask and get comfortable with, again, just partnering with your vendors. That’s why I always call them partners and not vendors. Be comfortable with partnering with them and saying, “Look here are two or three things I’m trying to accomplish. And I only see one of those things in the proposal that you sent to me. Are there some things that you can put in here that are revenue neutral? Or are there ways that you can reallocate our spend and help me hit these other budget objectives?” They’ll work with you. So negotiate with management and then partner with your vendors.

I’ve been talking with a lot of firms. And another thing that I’m seeing firms really start to do is ask themselves, “Where is the lowest risk and the highest return?” and vice versa, and making sure that your budget is representing that like, “Boy, this is the lowest risk and a really good return. So we’re going to do more of this. And this is a really high risk, very questionable return. We’re going to do less of this.” And by the way, having those conversations with your management committee or your manageing partners or your executive committee about the ways that you’re looking at risk versus return, or contextually where you are in the firm’s operational churn, if you will, those sorts of things will help you in the long run.

Jennifer Schaller

It’s really great that you point out the need to let your vendors know what your goals are. It’s very challenging sometimes when people are like, “What’s the price? You know, what, what, what is your best price?” What is important to you? It’s not really a negotiating technique, we want to know where to focus to best meet your needs. And if we have no concept of what your goals are, or what you’re trying to highlight, it makes it infinitely more challenging.

This year, or any historically, are there budget items that you would suggest CMOs pay more attention to this year than in previous years or anything that’s unique about this year that they might want to highlight other than the points that you made about using 2019 as a base point versus the previous two years? Which were just weird. Is there anything else different?

Beth Cuzzone

You know, I think this is the time everybody is peeking over the horizon wondering, “Is there a downturn? Is there a recession? Is there a down year coming? What do we do?” You know, you’ve got, you’re asking yourself all of those questions. I think this is also a year, when you’re looking at your budget, to look at things that are driving efficiencies, scalability, revenue generation, right? There’s a difference between cost and investment. Make sure that your budget has a nice healthy mix of, “These are things where we want to spend money to get more money. And then these are places where we want to spend money so that we can meet an objective,” and I call them return on objectives, and return on investments. “We want to be known in this new market. We want to open up an office in Texas. And so we’re going to be spending a lot of time and money and energy and budget on really getting the word out creating some top of mind awareness in Texas.” That’s an objective, right? If it is that we really want to get a little closer to the bottom quartile of our clients in terms of revenue and say, “How can we help them with more problems than we do now? How do we take them and really try to grow the wallet share that they spend on outside counsel?” That’s a return on investment. So you know, have that healthy mix on return on investment, and return on objective.

Jennifer Schaller

Fair enough. So briefly, your firm Intapp? How do they help law firms with their budgeting process? Are there specific things that they’re set up to do to help?

Beth Cuzzone

Thank you for asking me that and for being so gracious. Because yes, I think the answer is yes. So Intapp can help law firms create insights to find revenue, find where there’s work that’s more profitable, find where, you know, there’s whitespace, and opportunities, or be able to basically measure things, and have this one source of truth in your law firm, where you’ve got all of these technologies that help all of these different operating departments that all connect, that’s why it’s called Intapp, there’s an integration to this, and they all integrate and talk to each other. And those kinds of insights can inform law firms about the kind of money that they’re spending and the kind of return that they’re getting. And it can be as simple as looking at your marketing campaign open rate for your last email, all the way to looking at some very strategic insights of “here are some spaces or places in our firm where we could be working closer with clients, or an industry where we haven’t saturated as much as we could.” So it can go from tactical to strategic, and that’s what Intapp does. That’s why it’s such an amazing company.

Jennifer Schaller

So is Intapp more process or technology based or kind of marrying the both of them when they work with law firms?

Beth Cuzzone

That’s another great question. So it’s a technology company. And I think the thing I’ve been most surprised with is the brainpower that sits in Intapp and all of the people that are there to help clients successfully deploy, or change management professionals that help you get more engagement at your firm, or help you with use cases of smarter ways to use the technology.

So Intapp sells technology that has professionals that help you with the people in the process as well. It’s a little competitive secret.

Jennifer Schaller

Sounds like a good match. As always, we appreciate Beth’s time sharing her thoughts with us and her experience and kind of the trends that she’s seeing and marrying it with the experience that she’s had over the years. Thank you very much.

Beth Cuzzone

It was so great to see you, Jennifer. So great to see you. Thank you for inviting me and be well. True North.

Conclusion

Thank you for listening to the National Law Review’s Legal News Reach podcast. Be sure to follow us on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts for more episodes. For the latest legal news, or if you’re interested in publishing and advertising with us, visit www.natlawreview.com. We’ll be back soon with our next episode.

Article By The National Law Review Editorial Team of The National Law Review / The National Law Forum LLC

For more business of law legal news, click here to visit the National Law Review.

Copyright ©2022 National Law Forum, LLC

DHS Proposes Rule Updating I-9 Verification Requirements

On August 18, 2022, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) published a proposed rule in the Federal Register that would grant it broader authority to permit alternative document inspection procedures for I-9 document verification in lieu of the physical inspection requirement.

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, DHS implemented temporary accommodations for remote I-9 document inspection in order to encourage social distancing and remote work. These accommodations have been extended several times, and currently remain in effect until October 31, 2022. While the proposed rule does not directly make these accommodations permanent, it does codify into the regulations the agency’s authority to set forth either temporary or permanent alternative document inspection procedures.

The proposed rule provides significant flexibility to DHS in determining whether, when, and how to implement alternative examination procedures. According to the proposed rule, DHS may implement new examination options as part of a limited pilot program, upon the agency’s determination that such alternative procedures would not diminish the security of the I-9 verification process, or as a temporary measure in response to a public health emergency.

The proposed rule also includes details about how DHS may implement future document inspection changes, including:

  • limiting implementation only to employers enrolled in E-Verify

  • updating document retention requirements

  • changing the Form I-9 to allow employers to clearly note the use of alternative examination procedures

Now that the proposed rule has been published in the Federal Register, the public will have a 60-day comment period to provide feedback on the proposal as well as comments on how DHS may use this additional authority to make I-9 document inspection easier for employers. After the public comment period closes, DHS will have the opportunity to review and analyze all comments provided and, should the agency decide to move forward with the regulation, proceed with publishing the final rule.

Article By Derek J. Maka of Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C.

For more immigration legal news, click here to visit the National Law Review.

© 2022, Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C., All Rights Reserved.

Cal/OSHA COVID-19 Regulations Will Likely Continue in 2023

The current Cal/OSHA COVID-19 Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS) expires at the end of 2022. But Cal/OSHA is not done with COVID-19 regulations. There is a Non-Emergency Regulation in process. The Standards Board recently published its proposed non-emergency regulation and announced a public hearing for September 15, 2022.

Though the proposal is a non-emergency regulation, the proposed text states the requirements would only remain in effect for two years, except for certain recordkeeping requirements.

Here are other highlights of the proposed regulation:

  • Directs employers to include COVID-19 procedures in their written Injury and Illness Prevention Program (IIPP) or as a separate document.

  • As part of an employer’s COVID-19 procedures, an employer must provide training to employees regarding COVID-19

  • Employers must have effective methods and procedures for responding to COVID-19 cases in the workplace such as exclusion and quarantine requirements.

  • Employers will still have certain notice requirements regarding positive cases in the workplace.

  • Face covering requirements shall still follow California Department of Public Health requirements

One notable omission from the proposed regulation is exclusion pay, which was a very contentious requirement under the ETS.

Article By Sean Paisan of Jackson Lewis P.C.

For more coronavirus legal news, click here to visit the National Law Review.

Jackson Lewis P.C. © 2022

Monkeypox Outbreak Declared a Public Health Emergency

On August 4, 2022, the Biden administration declared the monkeypox outbreak a public health emergency. This comes at a time where the number of cases in the United States are rapidly rising and with cases found in almost every state. This declaration primarily affects testing and vaccination. The government’s focus on vaccination has primarily been on health care workers treating monkeypox patients and men who have sex with men. The declaration follows the World Health Organization’s (WHO) declaration last month of monkeypox as a public health emergency of international concern.

The information affecting the workplace is still somewhat limited. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends that people with monkeypox remain isolated at home or in another location for the duration of the illness, which typically can last two to four weeks.

It is still not known if monkeypox can be spread through respiratory secretions. Accordingly, a well-fitting mask and frequent handwashing are likely important preventive measures.

Monkeypox can spread to anyone through close, personal, often skin-to-skin contact, including:

  • via direct contact with monkeypox rash, scabs, or body fluids from a person with monkeypox;

  • by touching objects, fabrics (clothing, bedding, or towels), and surfaces that have been used by someone with monkeypox; and

  • possibly through contact with respiratory secretions.

Employers may wish to educate their employees about monkeypox, including that employees with concerns should consult their physicians or health department, and may wish to inquire about testing and vaccination. Employers may also wish to consider how they will handle absences of up to one month, if remote work is not a possibility and/or when remote work is a possibility. Knowledge is often a way to avoid panic in the workplace and both the CDC and WHO have excellent fact sheets on their websites. State health agencies are likely to have them as well.

It may also be worthwhile to consider how to protect employees who are required to handle linens used by other people, people who are frequently in close contact with others for extended periods, or who come into close physical contact with others. For example, in its monkeypox congregate settings guidelines, the CDC recommends that personal protective equipment (PPE) be worn when cleaning the area where an individual with monkeypox has spent time.

The CDC also stated in its monkeypox congregate settings guidelines that “[e]mployers must comply with [the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s] standards on Bloodborne Pathogens…, PPE…, Respiratory Protection…, and other requirements, including those established by state plans, whenever these requirements apply.”

Public health officials are emphasizing the fact that anyone can get monkeypox. The current outbreak is most prevalent among men having sex with other men, but can spread to anyone. Employers may want to stay attuned to any harassment or discrimination in the workplace resulting from misinformation about the disease.

Ogletree Deakins will continue to monitor and report on developments with respect to monkeypox.

Article By Katherine Dudley Helms of Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C.

For more labor and employment legal news, click here to visit the National Law Review.

© 2022, Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C., All Rights Reserved.