May 24, 2012

Supreme Court Leaves Intact Decision Refusing to Extend the Fair Labor Standards Act's Anti-Retaliation Provision to Prospective Employees

Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C.
Martha J. Zackin
Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C.
Thursday, February 23, 2012
Civil Procedure / Labor & Employment / Litigation / Trial Practice
All Federal
Printer-friendly
Email this Article
Download PDF
Reprints & Permissions

The Supreme Court has refused to consider the issue of whether the Fair Labor Standards Act’s anti-retaliation provision applies to prospective employees. Its refusal leaves intact a Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals decision extending the FLSA anti-retaliation provision to current and former employees only and barring such claims by prospective employees. You can read our previous entry on the Fourth Circuit’s decision here. We will provide further updates as other courts weigh in on this issue over time.

©1994-2012 Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C. All Rights Reserved.

About the Author

Martha J. Zackin
Of Counsel

Martha is Of Counsel in the firm's Boston office, practicing in the Employment, Labor & Benefits Section. She has more than 20 years of experience advising and representing clients on a broad range of employment law issues and in adversarial proceedings. In her role as an advisor to employers, boards of directors, and executives, Martha regularly provides practical advice and counsel on a wide range of employment-related issues, including employee relations and policy matters, violations of noncompetition, nonsolicitation and nondisclosure agreements, employee...

MJZackin@mintz.com
(617) 348-4415
www.mintzlevin.com/people/502/Martha_J_Zackin

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.