Caffarelli & Associates LtD

News

1 minute read

Department of Labor Proposes Rule Change to Expand FMLA Coverage for Same Sex Spouses

Published

On June 20, 2014, Secretary of Labor Tom Perez announced a proposed rule that would extend FMLA protections to otherwise eligible employees in same-sex marriages living in states that do not recognize such marriages. Presently, the FMLA’s definition of “spouse” only covers same-sex spouses living in states that recognize same-sex marriage. Under the proposed amendment, an individual in a legal same-sex marriage would be entitled to FMLA benefits even while living in a state that does not recognize same-sex marriage. The thrust of the amendment would permit opposite-sex and same-sex married spouses to enjoy the exact same FMLA rights, regardless of where they live.
The proposed amendment is consistent with the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Windsor. In Windsor, the Court struck down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act, which limited the definition of “marriage” and “spouse” to people in opposite-sex marriages, as unconstitutional. Following Windsor, President Obama instructed his Cabinet members to review all federal statutes to ensure that they permit all federal benefits now available in light of that decision.

Back to News

Recent Posts

Blog

A Call for Comprehensive Fee Shifting for Employment-Law Claims

By Alejandro Caffarelli, Caffarelli & Associates Ltd. Access to justice in employment law remains an elusive promise for the vast majority of American workers. While an array of federal and state laws purport to protect workers, the mechanisms for enforcing those rights are often inaccessible, rendering them meaningless. Administrative agencies and state equivalents tasked with investigating discrimination and wage violations, for example, are often chronically underfunded and subject to political erosion. As demonstrated by recent changes at the Equal Employment...

Read More
General

Supreme Court Bars State Administrative Hurdles for Federal Civil Rights Claims

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Friday in the case of Williams v. Washington (No. 23-191) that an Alabama law requiring people to go through the state’s administrative process before filing federal civil rights claims under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 is unconstitutional. The 5-4 decision found that the law created an unfair barrier to asserting federal rights. The law, upheld by Alabama’s Supreme Court in 2023, required unemployment benefits claimants to complete the state’s appeals process before going to court....

Read More
General

Supreme Court Rules on FLSA Evidence Standards in Overtime Exemption Case

The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled Wednesday that disputes over Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) exemptions do not require heightened evidence standards. Justice Brett Kavanaugh, writing for the court, rejected employees’ arguments for a “clear and convincing evidence” standard, reaffirming that the preponderance of evidence standard is appropriate in civil litigation unless explicitly altered by statute, constitutional requirements, or precedent involving severe government actions. The case, EMD Sales Inc. v. Carrera, centered on whether a higher standard should apply in...

Read More