Bringing Employees Back to Work: Navigating Legal Questions Facing Employers as Workplaces Reopen Webinar Presented by Murphy, Hesse, Toomey & Lehane Attorneys
On June 4, 2020, Murphy, Hesse, Toomey & Lehane, LLP, attorneys, Nan ONeill, Kier Wachterhauser, Sarah Spatafore and Peter McNulty held a webinar, Bringing Employees Back to Work: Navigating Legal Questions Facing Employers as Workplaces Reopen. The webinar focused on the legal environment surrounding reopening Massachusetts.
Kier Wachterhauser introduced ONeill as presenter and Spatafore and McNulty as panelists. Attorney Nan ONeill presented how to coordinate compliance with these state and federal mandates, and how to develop employee communications and required employee training to comply with new and existing training obligations. Spatafore and McNulty answer questions from the audience pertaining to their practice area.
Murphy, Hesse, Toomey & Lehane LLP is known throughout New England for its labor and employment practice as well as its expansive municipal law practice. The firm also has an extensive education law practice representing more than 180 public, private and nonprofit educational institutions from elementary through the collegiate level.
Tom Jorling, is an attorney, advisor to MHTL, former co-drafter of the Clean Air and Water Act and former Commissioner of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation under Governor Mario Cuomo. Tom Jorling served under 4 presidents, including Deputy Director of the Environmental Agency. Mr. Jorling was the recipient of the inaugural Boston College Law School Public Interest Law Foundation Distinction in Public Service Award in April 2019. Thomas Jorling pens the article below on the attack Read More
On June 15, 2020, the Supreme Court of the United States handed down a historic 6-3 decision authored by Justice Neil Gorsuch, in which the Court held that employers cannot discriminate against an individual on the basis of the individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity. This case, Bostock v. Clayton County, was a consolidation of three cases, involving two gay men, who were terminated based on their sexual orientation, and one transgender woman, who was terminated based on her gender identity.