Tim Coffield, a Charlottesville-based attorney, covers the SCOTUS case of Falk v. Brennan and its impact on the interpretation of the law of employment and control.Read More

In Christensen v. Harris County, 529 U.S. 576 (2000), the Supreme Court held that the Fair Labor Standards Act does not prohibit public employers from compelling employees to use compensatory time. Tim Coffield, attorney, explores this ruling.Read More

Charlottesville attorney Tim Coffield on the case of Kasten v. Saint-Gobain.Read More

Tim Coffield, a Charlottesville-based attorney, explores the Principal Activities Law.Read More

The Fair Labor Standards Act requires employers to pay minimum wages and overtime wages based on time worked by covered employees. Oftentimes, an employee has to spend time waiting to put equipment, walking to a worksite, or doing other preshift tasks necessary to perform her job. Is the employee entitled to compensation under the FLSA for that...Read More

Law of Joint Employment A worker’s joint employers are jointly and severally liable for any violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Salinas v. Commercial Interiors, Inc., 848 F.3d 125, 134 (4th Cir. 2017). This means that for purposes of the FLSA’s requirements that an employer pay minimum wages and overtime wages to non-exempt employees,...Read More

McKennon v. Nashville Banner: Law of After-Acquired Evidence What happens when an employer, having wrongfully terminated an employee (in violation of federal employment law), discovers in litigation that the employee did something that would have legitimately and lawfully lead to termination, had the employer known about it before wrongfully firing the employee? Does the employer...Read More

In Meritor Savings Bank v. Vinson, 477 U.S. 57 (1986), the Supreme Court recognized for the first time that sexual harassment is a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964..  As discussed in an earlier post, Title VII protects employees from workplace discrimination “because of” sex. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a). Meritor...Read More

In Smith v. City of Jackson, Miss., 544 U.S. 228 (2005), the Supreme Court recognized that the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, like Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, authorizes disparate impact claims. This means that an employee, to prevail on an age discrimination claim, does not necessarily have to prove her employer intended...Read More

In Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, 490 U.S. 228 (1989), the Supreme Court recognized Title VII’s prohibition on sex discrimination necessarily includes a prohibition on gender stereotyping. The female employee in Price Waterhouse was denied a promotion because she was “macho,” “tough-talking,” and used “foul language,” and therefore failed to conform to certain gender stereotypes related...Read More