The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)
|
||||||
|
. . . . § 825.104(a). . . .
. . . . § 825.104(d). . . .
. . . . § 825.104(a). . . .
. . . . § 825.104(d) provides additional context: An employer includes any person who acts directly or indirectly . . .
. . . . § 825.104(d) ); see Darby , 287 F.3d at 681 ("The implementing regulations of the FMLA recognize the . . .
. . . . § 825.104(d). . . . The implementing regulations state that this section mirrors the FLSA. 29 C.F.R. § 825.104(d). . . .
. . . . § 825.104(d); see also Haybarger v. Lawrence Cty. . . .
. . . . § 825.104(d) (“As under the FLSA, individuals such as corporate officers ‘acting in the interest of . . .
. . . . § 825.104. . . . . § 825.104. . . .
. . . . § 825.104(a). . . . See 29 C.F.R. § 825.104(c)(1), The difference between the “joint employer” and the “integrated employer . . . Compare 29 C.F.R. § 825.106 with § 825.104(c)(2). . . . single criterion, “but rather the entire relationship is to be reviewed in its totality.” 29 C.F.R. § 825.104 . . . single criterion, but rather the entire relationship is to be reviewed in its totality.” 29 C.F.R. § 825.104 . . .
. . . . § 825.104(d); Saavedra, 748 F.Supp.2d at 1283 (noting that “individuals such as corporate officers . . .
. . . . § 825.104(d). . . .
. . . . § 825.104(c)(2). . . .
. . . .; see also 29 C.F.R § 825.104(c)(2). . . . control of labor relations; and 4) the degree of common ownership or financial control. 29 C.F.R. § 825.104 . . . Although executives typically may be liable under the FMLA, see 29 U.S.C. § 2611(d); 29 C.F.R. § 825.104 . . .
. . . . § 825.104(c). . . .
. . . . § 825.104(d); see Smith v. Westchester Cnty., 769 F.Supp.2d 448, 476 (S.D.N.Y.2011); Johnson v. . . .
. . . . § 825.104(a)— promulgated by the U.S. . . .
. . . . § 825.104(c). . . .
. . . . § 825.104(a) (likewise providing that “[e]mployers covered by the FMLA ... include ... any successor . . . employer to any of the employees of such employer.” 29 U.S.C. § 2611(4)(A)(ii)(I); see also 29 C.F.R. § 825.104 . . .
. . . . § 825.104(c)(2). . . .
. . . . § 825.104(d). . . .
. . . . § 825.104(a). . . . integrated employer will be counted in determining employer coverage and employee eligibility.” 29 C.F.R. § 825.104 . . . See 29 C.F.R. § 825.104(c)(2); Tasciyan, 2012 WL 4811290, at *7. Notably, Ms. . . . See 29 C.F.R. § 825.104(c)(2); Tasciyan, 2012 WL 4811290, at *7. . . .
. . . . § 825.104(c) or a “joint employer” under 29 C.F.R. § 825.106 so that their number of employees could . . .
. . . . §§ 825.104(c), 825.106(b)(2); see Baer v. . . .
. . . . § 825.104(c)(2). . . .
. . . . § 825.104(d). . . .
. . . . §§ 825.104(c), 825.106. The same regulations do not exist in the context of Title VII. . . . .
. . . . § 825.104(a), which defines which employers are covered by the FMLA and states that “individuals such . . .
. . . . § 825.104(d), but to determine whether an individual qualifies as an individual employer acting “in . . .
. . . . § 825.104(d)). . . .
. . . . § 825.104(a). . . . . § 825.104(d). . . . the employer, any successor in interest of a covered employer, and any public agency.” 29 C.F.R. § 825.104 . . .
. . . . § 825.104(c)(2). See Dey v. Marshall, No. 01 C 9810, 2002 WL 773989, at *2 (N.D.Ill. . . .
. . . . § 825.104(d) (2009) (emphasis added). . . . . § 825.104(d) connotes employees of a private corporation, but the clause is introduced by the phrase . . .
. . . . § 825.104 (1995). b. . . .
. . . . § 825.104(a))). . . . (See § 825.600.) 29 C.F.R. § 825.104(a). . . . Id. § 825.104(d). . Módica, 465 F.3d at 186. . Mitchell, 343 F.3d at 832. . Id. . Cf. . . .
. . . . § 825.104(a))). The Court agrees with the reasoning of the Modica court. . . . of an employer’ are individually liable for any violations of the requirements of FMLA. 29 C.F.R. § 825.104 . . .
. . . . § 825.104(d). . . . employer’ are individually liable for any violations of the requirements of the FMLA.” 29 C.F.R. § 825.104 . . .
. . . . § 825.104(c)(2). . . .
. . . . § 825.104(c)(1) and (2). . . .
. . . . § 825.104(a) provides that "employers covered by FMLA also include any person acting, directly or indirectly . . . the employer, any successor in interest of a covered employer, and any public agency.” 29 C.F.R. § 825.104 . . . See 29 C.F.R. § 825.104(d) (“As under the FLSA, individuals such as corporate officers ‘acting in the . . .
. . . . § 825.104. . . .
. . . . § 825.104(a). . . .
. . . . § 825.104(c)(2). . . .
. . . . § 825.104(c)(2). . . . entities be “highly integrated” — just integrated enough to satisfy the factors described in 29 C.F.R. § 825.104 . . . Compare 29 C.F.R. § 825.104(c)(2) with Radio Union, 380 U.S. at 256, 85 S.Ct. 876. . . .
. . . . § 825.104(c)(1) & 825.106(d) (“Employees jointly employed by two employers must be counted by both . . .
. . . . § 825.104. . . . .
. . . . § 825.104(d). It is clear that the City of Johnstown is an employer under the above definition. . . .
. . . . § 825.104(d). . . .
. . . . § 825.104(a) and 825.105(e) (the 20 weeks need not be consecutive). . . . See 29 C.F.R. § 825.104(a) (“Employers covered by FMLA also include ... any public agency. . . .
. . . . § 825.104(c)(1). . . . eparate entities will be deemed to be parts of a single employer for purposes of FMLA.” 29 C.F.R. § 825.104 . . . centralized control of labor relations, and (4) degree of common ownership/financial control. 29 C.F.R. § 825.104 . . . integrated employer will be counted in determining employer coverage and employee eligibility.” 29 C.F.R. § 825.104 . . . Compare 29 C.F.R. § 825.106 with § 825.104(c)(2). . . .
. . . . § 825.104(c)(2)). To begin, there is no indication of interrelated operations. . . .
. . . . § 825.104(c)(2) because of the overlap in the substance and administration of their employment policies . . . motion on the basis that SPR and GPC are not integrated employers within the meaning of 29 C.F.R. § 825.104 . . . where 50 or more employees are employed by the employer within 75 miles of that worksite. 29 C.F.R. 825.104 . . . corporation is a single employer rather than its separate establishments or divisions.” 29 C.F.R. § 825.104 . . . Compare 29 C.F.R. § 825.106 with § 825.104(c)(2). . . .
. . . . § 825.104(a)). We do not find these arguments persuasive. . . . the employer, any successor in interest of a covered employer, and any public agency.” 29 C.F.R. § 825.104 . . . of an employer” are individually liable for any violations of the requirements of FMLA. 29 C.F.R. § 825.104 . . .
. . . . § 825.104(d) (“As under the FLSA, individuals such as corporate officers 'acting in the interest of . . .
. . . . § 825.104(d) (same standard as “employer” under the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 203(d)). . . .
. . . . § 825.104(c)(2). . . .
. . . . § 825.104(c)(2). Morrison fails to introduce any evidence concerning the first factor. . . .
. . . interest of an employer’ are individually liable for any violations of the requirements of FMLA.” 29 CFR § 825.104 . . .
. . . . § 825.104(c)(2). . . . fail to recognize is that the regulations require consideration of all four factors, see 29 C.F.R. § 825.104 . . . (c)(2), and the Court believes that § 825.104(c)(2) is entitled to deference. . . .
. . . . § 825.104(c)(2)). . . .
. . . . § 825.104(d); see also Chandler v. . . . See 29 C.F.R. § 825.104(a) (“Public agencies are covered employers without regard to the number of employees . . . Title twenty nine 29 C.F.R. § 825.104(a) provides that “employers covered by FMLA also include any person . . . the employer, any successor in interest of a covered employer, and any public agency.” 29 C.F.R. § 825.104 . . . See 29 C.F.R. § 825.104(d) (“As under the FLSA, individuals such as corporate officers ‘acting in the . . .
. . . . § 825.104(d). . . .
. . . . § 825.104(c)(1). . . . See 29 C.F.R. §§ 825.104, 825.106. . . . Centralized control of labor relations; and (iv) Degree of common ownership/financial control. 29 C.F.R. § 825.104 . . . .1999), the Fourth Circuit thoroughly analyzed the integrated 'employer test set forth in 29 C.F.R. § 825.104 . . . See 29 C.F.R. § 825.104(c). . . .
. . . . § 825.104 (2002). . . . of any single criterion, but rather the entire relationship ... viewed in its totality.” 29 C.F.R. § 825.104 . . .
. . . . § 825.104 (2002). . . .
. . . . § 825.104(d). These regulations also suggest that individual liability arises under the FMLA. . . . Regulations under the FMLA, 29 C.F.R. § 825.104(d) (2001), also take the position that an “employer” . . .
. . . . § 825.104(d). . . . employer’ are individually liable for any violations of the requirements of the FMLA.” 29 C.F.R. § 825.104 . . .
. . . . § 825.104. . . .
. . . . § 825.104(d) (2000). . . . employer’ are individually liable for any violations of the requirements of the FMLA.” 29 C.F.R. § 825.104 . . .
. . . . § 825.104(c)(2). . . .
. . . . '§ 825.104 discusses which employers are covered by the FMLA and states that “individuals such as corporate . . . officers” may be individually liable. 29 C.F.R. § 825.104(d)(emphasis added). . . .
. . . . § 825.104(a) states that the FMLA covers any employer that “employs 50 or more employees for each working . . .
. . . . § 825.104(d). . . .
. . . . § 825.104(c)(2), and, therefore, the defendants were employers under the FMLA. . . . that ACI, MAI, KPAC, WCAC, VAC, AAC, WSA, and BCG constituted an “integrated employer,” 29 C.F.R. § 825.104 . . . defendants and KPAC, WCAC, VAC, AAC, WSA, and BCG constituted an “integrated employer,” 29 C.F.R. § 825.104 . . . See 29 C.F.R. § 825.104(c)(2). . . . This court need not address whether 29 C.F.R. § 825.104(c)(2) is entitled to full Chevron deference, . . .
. . . . § 825.104(a). . . .
. . . . § 825.104(d). . . .
. . . . § 825.104(d). . . .
. . . . § 825.104, which addresses the issue of “[w]hat employers are covered by the [FMLA],” provides in pertinent . . .
. . . . § 825.104. . . . .
. . . . § 825.104(d). . . .
. . . . § 825.104(d) (emphasis added). . . .
. . . . § 825.104). . . . calendar workweeks in the current or preceding calendar year.” 29 U.S.C. § 2611 (4)(A)(i); 29 C.F.R. § 825.104 . . . See 29 C.F.R. § 825.104(c). . . . . § 825.104(c)(2). See 29 C.F.R. § 825.104(c). . See Exhibit 8 to Sieger Affidavit [Doc. # 42], . . . .
. . . . § 825.104. . See Stewart Dep. at 80. . See Plaintiffs’ Supplement To Oral Argument, page 3. . . . .
. . . . § 825.104(a) (West 1997). . . .
. . . . § 825.104(d). . . .
. . . . § 825.104(d). Thus, the Court will look to FLSA case law for guidance on this matter. In Brock v. . . .
. . . . § 825.104(d) (noting equivalence of FMLA’s and FLSA’s definition of employer). . . . As cited in Freemon, 29 C.F.R. § 825.104(d) states that the definition of employer is the same under . . . The regulations codified at 29 C.F.R. § 825.104 discuss these two issues separately, id. at (c) and ( . . .
. . . . § 825.104(d)) (noting equivalence of FMLA’s and FLSA’s definition of employer). . . .