The monumental decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization to overturn Roe v. Wade presents significant challenges for employers and health plans. According to this Law360 article, employers should begin reviewing state laws, evaluating internal company policies, gauging employee reactions and preparing for legal challenges. McDermott’s Sarah Raaii called the Supreme Court’s decision “an administrative and potentially employee relations nightmare for employers.”
“It creates a lot of challenges for employers who just want to do right by their employees and continue offering these abortion benefits that they have historically done in the past,” Raaii said.
The US Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and the Treasury recently released Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) regarding the implementation of certain reporting provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The FAQs were released to provide clarity on the required drug price disclosures identified in the Transparency in Coverage final rule (the Rule) issued on October 29, 2020. As described in this SHRM article, employers are responsible for making sure that these disclosures are ready and available.
If the US Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade (as suggested by a leaked draft on May 2), employers who want to provide abortion coverage to employees and their families could encounter serious challenges. In this Bloomberg Law article, McDermott’s Sarah G. Raaii noted that employers that provide travel expenses for abortions might encounter resistance from state laws like a Texas statue that permits citizens to sue abortion providers for abortions performed around six weeks.
“If a state wants to interpret this very broadly—and it seems that some of them have indicated that they do—to really just punish anyone involved even peripherally with providing abortion in the states, employers could potentially be at risk.” Raaii said.
What are some of the challenges and opportunities of hybrid work arrangements? In this Lexology GTDT Market Intelligence article, McDermott Partner Carole Spink offers insight about tracking remote work, navigating local rules, and protecting confidential and propriety information.
Many employers will likely encourage vaccination rather than mandate it. In this Ladders article, McDermott Partner Michelle Strowhiro notes the administrative burdens associated with tracking mandatory employee vaccination.
The process of recruiting and onboarding new employees will require re-examination as remote work becomes a permeant fixture of the American workplace. In this Law360 article, McDermott Partner Ellen Bronchetti offers perspective about how companies will need to modify these policies and procedures.
“My concern when you don’t have the level of engagement that you used to have when you brought an employee in the door, is whether or not a company’s policies and practices are adequate to instruct employees [about] the rules [and] expectations,” Bronchetti said.
As the world enters the third year of the COVID-19 pandemic, employers have gained a greater understanding about the virus’ relationship with US anti-discrimination laws. With the inevitable rise of future variants and long-haul COVID-19 cases, however, businesses are still navigating murky waters. In thisLaw360 article, McDermott Partner Lindsay Ditlow offers perspective about worker accommodation requests and what they mean for employers.
US employers have grown increasingly interested in identifying incentives that increase COVID-19 vaccination among employees. The US Departments of Labor, Treasury and Human and Human Services recently issued guidance regarding the application of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPPA) wellness rules to vaccine-related premium surcharges and discounts, clarifying that employers may charge vaccine premium incentives if they adhere to the requirements of activity-only health-contingent programs. In this Employee Benefit Plan Review article, McDermott Partner Judith Wethall and McDermott Associate Sarah G. Raaii outline what this HIPPA guidance means for employers.
On February 10, 2022, the US Senate passed the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021 (the Act), a bipartisan bill that invalidates and renders unenforceable predispute arbitration agreements in any case alleging sexual assault or sexual harassment. The US House of Representatives passed a version of the bill on February 7, 2022. US President Joe Biden is expected to sign the bill into law soon.
Even though the US Supreme Court blocked the US Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s (OSHA) vaccinate-or-test mandate for most employers, there is still confusion around who covers the cost for employee COVID-19 tests. In this Law360 article, McDermott’s Dawn Peacock outlines what employers need to know.
Subscribe
