Tag: Title

  • White House Approves Title IX Final Rule — Rule Release Imminent – CUPA-HR

    White House Approves Title IX Final Rule — Rule Release Imminent – CUPA-HR

    by CUPA-HR | April 12, 2024

    On April 10, the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) announced it had concluded review of the Department of Education’s (ED) final rule to amend Title IX. OIRA review is the final step in the regulatory process, and we expect the ED will issue the final rule any day now. We will send another alert as soon as ED publishes the final rule.

    The ED released the text of the proposed rule on June 23, 2022, though the Federal Register did not officially publish the proposal until several weeks later on July 12, 2022. The agency received over 240,000 comments in response, including CUPA-HR comments seeking clarification on the overlaps between the ED’s proposal with institutions’ existing obligations to address employment discrimination. CUPA-HR also joined comments led by the American Council on Education.

    The Federal Government’s Fall 2022 Regulatory Agenda had set the target release date of the final rule for May 2023, but the Department had to further delay that timeline to review all comments submitted in response to the proposed rule and address them in the final rule. Most recently, the ED indicated a March 2024 release of the final rule in the Fall 2023 Regulatory Agenda.

    CUPA-HR plans to hold a timely webinar on the final rule after publication. In the meantime, CUPA-HR will keep members apprised of additional updates on the Title IX final rule, including completion of the review and publication of the rule.



    Source link

  • Department of Education Moves Forward With Title IX Final Rule – CUPA-HR

    Department of Education Moves Forward With Title IX Final Rule – CUPA-HR

    by CUPA-HR | February 5, 2024

    On February 2, 2024, the Department of Education (ED) sent its highly anticipated Title IX final rule to the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) for review. OIRA review is the final step before the Title IX rule is published. While ED’s final rule is being reviewed, the public is not provided with any specific details on changes to the proposed rule. However, interested stakeholders can request a meeting with the administrator while a rule is under review.

    The Department of Education introduced a Title IX proposed rule in June 2022, under which the department proposed to replace the Trump administration’s 2020 Title IX rule and establish expanded protections against sex-based discrimination to cover sexual orientation, gender identity, and pregnancy or related conditions. CUPA-HR submitted comments in response to the proposed rule, in which we brought attention to the possible impact the proposed regulations could have on how higher education institutions address employment discrimination.

    The Department of Education has been reviewing the 240,000 submitted comments in response to the Title IX proposed rule since the comment period closed in September 2022. The final rule was initially included in the Fall 2022 Regulatory Agenda with a target release date in May 2023, but the department had to further delay that timeline to ensure all comments submitted in response to the proposed rule were reviewed and addressed in the final rule. Most recently, ED indicated a March 2024 release of the final rule in the Fall 2023 Regulatory Agenda.

    OIRA reviews typically last between 30-60 days, though the agency has up to 90 days to review the rule before it is released to the public. As such, the final rule could be released as soon as early March, possibly meeting the Fall 2023 Regulatory Agenda’s target date.

    Once the final rule is published, CUPA-HR will hold a webinar presented by Title IX experts. In the meantime, CUPA-HR will keep members apprised of additional updates on the Title IX final rule, including when the review is completed and the rule is published.



    Source link

  • Overtime and Title IX Final Rules Targeted for Early 2024 Release in Fall Regulatory Agenda – CUPA-HR

    Overtime and Title IX Final Rules Targeted for Early 2024 Release in Fall Regulatory Agenda – CUPA-HR

    by CUPA-HR | December 12, 2023

    On December 6, the Biden administration released the Fall 2023 Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions, providing the public with an update on the regulatory and deregulatory activities under development across approximately 67 federal departments, agencies and commissions. This release is the second and final regulatory agenda for 2023, and it sets target dates for upcoming regulatory actions mainly for the first half of 2024.

    CUPA-HR has highlighted the following items from the Fall 2023 Regulatory Agenda for members to be aware of as we enter the new year. As a reminder, these target dates are not a guarantee, but they provide insight into when we can possibly expect the regulations to be published. CUPA-HR’s government relations team will continue to monitor for any updates on the following regulations and others that may impact the higher education space.

    Department of Labor

    Wage and Hour Division — Defining and Delimiting the Exemptions for Executive, Administrative, Professional, Outside Sales, and Computer Employees

    According to the Fall 2023 Regulatory Agenda, the Department of Labor (DOL)’s Wage and Hour Division (WHD) has targeted April 2024 for release of the final rule to update the Fair Labor Standards Act’s overtime pay regulations. The final rule seeks to increase the minimum salary threshold required for white-collar professionals to maintain exempt status under the FLSA.

    On September 8, WHD released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to update the salary threshold. The NPRM increases the minimum salary threshold from its current level of $35,568 per year ($684 per week) to $60,209 annually ($1,158 per week), which amounts to a nearly 70% increase.* Additionally, WHD proposes to automatically increase the salary level every three years by tying the threshold to the 35th percentile of full-time salaried wages in the lowest wage census region. DOL indicated in the proposed rule that it is considering implementing an effective date in the final rule that could come as soon as 60 days after the final rule is published to the public.

    CUPA-HR was joined by 49 other higher education associations in submitting comments in response to the NPRM. In our comments, we raised concerns with the timing of this increase, the size of the proposed increase, the implementation of automatic updates, and the timeline for regulatory compliance that WHD anticipates. Our comments were informed by a CUPA-HR member survey, in which over 300 members provided feedback on their concerns with and thoughts about the proposal. For ongoing updates, visit CUPA-HR’s FLSA Overtime page.

    Wage and Hour Division — Employee or Independent Contractor Classification under the Fair Labor Standards Act

    The Fall 2023 Regulatory Agenda indicates that WHD anticipated releasing the FLSA independent contractor rule in November 2023. The final rule has been at the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) for review since September 28, 2023, and once the agency finishes its review, the rule will be published.

    On October 13, 2022, the DOL published an NPRM to rescind the current method for determining independent contractor status under the FLSA. The current test, finalized by the Trump administration in 2021, has two core factors of control and investment with three additional factors (integration, skill and permanency) that are relevant only if those core factors are in disagreement. The Biden rule proposes a return to a “totality-of-the-circumstances analysis” of multiple factors in an economic reality test, including the following six factors, which are equally weighted with no core provisions:

    • The extent to which the work is integral to the employer’s business.
    • The worker’s opportunity for profit or loss depending on managerial skill.
    • The investments made by the worker and the employer.
    • The worker’s use of skill and initiative.
    • The permanency of the work relationship.
    • The degree of control exercised or retained by the employer.

    Employment and Training Administration — Revising Schedule A to Include Updating Occupations in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM)

    The regulatory agenda indicates that DOL’s Employment and Training Administration (ETA) aimed to issue a Request for Information (RFI) in November 2023. According to the notice in the agenda, ETA is seeking input from the public “on whether Schedule A serves as an effective tool for addressing current labor shortages, and how the Department may create a timely, coherent and transparent methodology for identifying STEM occupations that are experiencing labor shortages in keeping with its requirements under the Immigration and Nationality Act … to ensure the employment of foreign nationals does not displace U.S. workers or adversely affect their wages and working conditions.”

    The RFI was sent to OIRA for review before publication on November 11, 2023, and will likely be released to the public soon.

    Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

    Regulations to Implement the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act

    In December 2023, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) plans to issue a final rule to implement the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA). The rule will create a framework for the EEOC on how to enforce protections granted to pregnant workers under the PWFA. For a detailed analysis of the proposed rule on implementing the PWFA, please see CUPA-HR’s blog post.

    In December 2022, the PWFA was signed into law through the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023. The law establishes employer obligations to provide reasonable accommodations to pregnant employees so long as such accommodations do not cause an undue hardship on the business, and makes it unlawful to take adverse action against a qualified employee requesting or using such reasonable accommodations. The requirements of the law apply only to businesses with 15 or more employees.

    Unlike the other regulations with target dates, the PWFA final rule has a statutory deadline for publication, which is December 29, 2023. Given this upcoming deadline, we will likely see the EEOC publish this rule soon.

    Department of Education

    Office for Civil Rights — Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Sex in Education Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance

    According to the regulatory agenda, the Department of Education (ED) anticipates releasing the highly anticipated Title IX final rule in March 2024. The rulemaking would finalize the June 2022 NPRM to roll back and replace the Trump administration’s 2020 regulations while simultaneously expanding protections against sex-based discrimination to cover sexual orientation, gender identity, and pregnancy or related conditions.

    CUPA-HR filed comments in September 2022 in response to the NPRM. In our comments, we brought attention to the possible impact the proposed regulations could have on how higher education institutions address employment discrimination.

    The new March target deadline marks the third time ED has delayed the issuance of the Title IX final rule. The rule was originally targeted for release in May 2023, but ED subsequently pushed the target date back to October 2023 via a blog post, when it became clear that the department would not meet the May timeline. Since ED missed the October timeline, they have faced increased pressure from Congressional Democrats and other advocacy groups to publish the final rule as soon as possible. While it’s not a guarantee ED will be able to publish the final rule in March 2024, the increased pressure will certainly motivate the department to move quickly.

    CUPA-HR plans to hold a webinar to inform members of the final rule’s new requirements once the final rule has been published. Details to come.

    Office for Civil Rights — Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Sex in Education Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance: Sex-Related Eligibility Criteria for Male and Female Athletic Teams

    Similar to the Title IX final rule above, ED plans to issue a final rule on student eligibility in athletic programs under Title IX in March 2024. The rule would finalize the NPRM that was released by the department in April 2023.

    Under the NPRM, schools that receive federal funding would not be permitted to adopt or apply a “one-size-fits-all” ban on transgender students participating on teams consistent with their gender identity. Instead, the proposal allows schools the flexibility to develop team eligibility criteria that serve important educational objectives, such as fairness in competition and preventing sports-related injuries. The department further explains that the eligibility criteria must take into account the sport, level of competition, and grade or education level of students participating, and the criteria would have to minimize harm to students whose opportunity to participate on a team consistent with their gender identity would be limited or denied.

    The NPRM received over 150,000 comments addressing support for and concerns with the proposal. ED must review all comments before issuing a final rule to implement these regulations, which is the likely cause of delay for both this rulemaking and the broader Title IX final rule.

    Department of Homeland Security

    U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services — Modernizing H-1B Requirements and Oversight and Providing Flexibility in the F-1 Program

    On October 23, the Department of Homeland Security’s U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) issued a proposed rule that aims to improve the H-1B program by simplifying the application process, increasing the program’s efficiency, offering more advantages and flexibilities to both petitioners and beneficiaries, and strengthening the program’s integrity measures.

    Prompted by challenges with the H-1B visa lottery, USCIS has prioritized a proposed rule to address the system’s integrity. The proposed rule is aimed at strengthening the lottery registration process and preventing fraud, and it makes critical revisions to underlying H-1B regulations. For a detailed summary of what the H-1B proposal includes, see CUPA-HR’s blog post.

    The NPRM is open for public comment until December 22, 2023. The Fall 2023 Regulatory Agenda included the regulations, but it did not provide a timeline for issuing the final rule, likely because the comment period is still open for the NPRM.

    U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services — Fee Schedule and Changes to Certain Other Immigration Benefit Request Requirements

    In April 2024, USCIS anticipates issuing a final rule to adjust the fees charged by the agency for immigration and naturalization benefit requests.

    USCIS published an NPRM on this issue in January 2023. The comprehensive proposal has implications for both employment-based and family-based filings, but certain provisions would have significant impacts for higher education employers. Specifically, the proposed rule includes a provision to fund the Asylum Program with employer petition fees, which would be a $600 fee paid by any employers who file either a Form I-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker, or Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker. Additionally, the proposed rule seeks to increase almost all employment-based and employment-based “adjacent” filing fees. For more information on the details of this proposed rule, see CUPA-HR’s blog post.

    On March 13, 2023, CUPA-HR joined the American Council on Education’s comments in response to the NPRM. The comments address higher ed-specific concerns with the proposal to increase fees for immigration and naturalization benefit requests, including concerns about the impact the increased fees will have on international scholars and institutions’ ability to hire nonimmigrant workers, including H-1B workers.

    U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services — Petition for Immigrant Worker Reforms

    The regulatory agenda shows that USCIS plans to issue an NPRM in August 2024 that will “amend its regulations governing employment-based immigrant petitions in the first, second and third preference classifications.” According to the posting, the proposed rule would “codify current policy guidance and implement administrative decisions regarding successorship-in-interest and ability to pay; update provisions governing extraordinary ability and outstanding professors and researchers; modernize outdated provisions for individuals of extraordinary ability and outstanding professors and researchers; … implement reforms to ensure the integrity of the I-140 program; and correct errors and omissions.”

    U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services — Modernizing Regulations Governing Nonimmigrant Workers

    In October 2024, USCIS plans to issue an NPRM to update employment authorization rules for dependent spouses of certain nonimmigrants and to increase flexibilities for nonimmigrant workers. CUPA-HR plans to monitor for any updates to this rule as it may apply to H-1B or other relevant nonimmigrant visas used by institutions.

    Department of State

    Pilot Program to Resume Renewal of H-1B Nonimmigrant Visas in the United States for Certain Qualified Noncitizens

    In February 2024, the Department of State plans to begin a pilot program to “resume domestic visa renewal for qualified H-1B nonimmigrant visa applicants who meet certain requirements.” The department will issue a notice in the Federal Register that will describe pilot program participation requirements and will provide “information on how those falling within the bounds of the pilot program may apply for domestic visa renewal.” The pilot program has been at OIRA since October 17, meaning the pilot notice could be published sooner than anticipated.

    * The discrepancy between our figure of $60,209 and the DOL’s preamble figure of $55,068 arises from DOL’s own projections based on anticipated wage growth. The DOL’s proposed rule is rooted in 2022 data (yielding the $55,068 figure), but a footnote in the NPRM confirms that the salary threshold will definitely change by the time the final rule is issued to reflect the most recent data. Our comments, aiming to respond to the most probable salary threshold at the time a final rule is released, references the DOL’s projected figure for Q1 2024, which is $60,209. We do not believe DOL will be able to issue a final rule before Q1 2024, so we are incorporating this projected figure into our response to the NPRM. In essence, our goal is to provide members with a clearer picture of the likely salary figure when the final rule comes into play.



    Source link

  • Department of Education Delays Target Release of Title IX Rulemaking to October – CUPA-HR

    Department of Education Delays Target Release of Title IX Rulemaking to October – CUPA-HR

    by CUPA-HR | May 30, 2023

    On May 26, the Department of Education published a blog post stating that the release of the anticipated Title IX final rule will be delayed until at least October 2023. The final rule was previously targeted in the Fall 2022 Regulatory Agenda for May 2023.

    In the blog post, the department states that they need additional time to review the 240,000 comments they received in response to the Title IX proposed rule that was issued in July 2022. The department said that the 240,000 comments are nearly twice the number of comments the department received during the Trump administration’s Title IX rulemaking process, which included the release of a proposed rule in November 2018 and the subsequent final rule in May 2020. The department added that the new target date of October 2023 will be reflected in the upcoming Spring 2023 Regulatory Agenda, which will likely be released in the next month.

    As a reminder, the Biden administration’s Title IX rulemaking rolls back the Trump administration’s 2020 regulations, specifically with respect to its grievance procedures, while simultaneously expanding protections against sex-based discrimination to cover sexual orientation, gender identity, and pregnancy or related conditions. CUPA-HR filed comments in September 2022 in response to the NPRM, in which we brought attention to the possible impact the proposed regulations could have on how higher education institutions address employment discrimination.

    In addition to the Title IX rulemaking, the blog post also states that the final rule on transgender student eligibility in athletic programs under Title IX will also be delayed until at least October 2023. Released on April 6, the proposed rule establishes that schools that receive federal funding would not be permitted to adopt or apply a one-size-fits-all ban on transgender students participating on teams consistent with their gender identity and would instead allow schools the flexibility to develop team eligibility criteria that serves important educational objectives, such as fairness in competition and preventing sports-related injuries.

    CUPA-HR will continue to monitor for updates on the Title IX final rule.



    Source link

  • Department of Education Releases Title IX Rulemaking on Transgender Student Eligibility in School Athletics – CUPA-HR

    Department of Education Releases Title IX Rulemaking on Transgender Student Eligibility in School Athletics – CUPA-HR

    by CUPA-HR | April 12, 2023

    On April 6, the U.S. Department of Education released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) on student eligibility for athletic teams under Title IX. The proposed rulemaking focuses on transgender students’ eligibility to participate on athletic teams as legislation and policies at the federal, state and local levels have been introduced to ban transgender student participation in athletic programs.

    Under the NPRM, schools that receive federal funding would not be permitted to adopt or apply a “one-size-fits-all” ban on transgender students participating on teams consistent with their gender identity. Instead, the proposal allows schools the flexibility to develop team eligibility criteria that serves important educational objectives, such as fairness in competition and preventing sports-related injuries. The Department further explains that the eligibility criteria must take into account the sport, level of competition, and grade or education level of students participating, and the criteria would have to minimize harm to students whose opportunity to participate on a team consistent with their gender identity would be limited or denied.

    The NPRM comes after the Biden administration announced its intention to release such a proposed rule after it excluded language on transgender student eligibility in athletics in its June 2022 Title IX proposed rule. The rule comes as policymakers at the federal, state and local levels have introduced and passed legislation that bans transgender participation on women’s athletic teams. Most recently, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 734, the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act, out of the Education and the Workforce Committee, where it now awaits a full floor vote. The bill would prohibit federally-funded education programs or activities to operate, sponsor or facilitate athletic programs or activities that allow individuals of the male sex to participate in programs or activities that are designated for women or girls, defining “sex” as an individual’s reproductive biology and genetics at birth.

    Public comments in response to the NPRM will be due 30 days from the date of publication in the Federal Register. CUPA-HR will work with other higher education associations to fully analyze the NPRM and respond accordingly.



    Source link

  • Department of Education’s OCR Issues Resource Documents on Title IX Compliance for Athletic Programs – CUPA-HR

    Department of Education’s OCR Issues Resource Documents on Title IX Compliance for Athletic Programs – CUPA-HR

    by CUPA-HR | March 1, 2023

    On February 17, the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) issued three resource documents on Title IX compliance for school athletic programs. The first resource document covers support for equal opportunity in school athletic programs generally, while the other two cover Title IX and athletic opportunities at K-12 schools and colleges and universities separately.

    According to the OCR, these documents were designed “to help students, parents, coaches, athletic directors and school officials evaluate whether a school is meeting its legal duty to provide equal athletic opportunity regardless of sex,” and they provide examples of situations that may mean a school is not complying with Title IX requirements. The guidance does not make any changes to existing enforcement procedures for the OCR, rather, it is intended to be used by institutions to ensure that their existing protocols and programs are compliant with Title IX.

    Supporting Equal Opportunity in School Athletic Programs

    The first resource document reiterates Title IX’s prohibition of discrimination on the basis of sex in education programs and activities, including athletic programs, that receive federal funds. It states that Title IX requires schools to effectively accommodate the athletic interests and abilities of their students regardless of sex, and provide equal opportunity in the benefits, opportunities and treatment provided for their athletic teams. It also clarifies that Title IX requires colleges and universities to not discriminate on the basis of sex in the provision of any athletic scholarships or financial assistance to students.

    The resource document included four examples of situations that may surface Title IX concerns at colleges and universities, which are listed below:

    • The men’s teams at a college receives new athletic apparel and gear each year, while the women’s teams must use old apparel and purchase some of their own equipment.
    • Across its entire athletic program, a college awards disproportionately more athletic financial assistance to men than women.
    • A university provides funds for its coaches to recruit athletes for its men’s football and basketball teams because it considers those teams to be “flagship sports.” It provides no funds for coaches to recruit women athletes. As a result, the school has difficulty attracting women to participate in its athletic program.
    • Women are underrepresented in a university’s athletic program compared to their representation in the student body. The university would have to offer 54 additional spots for its women students on existing or new teams for women to have substantially proportionate athletic participation opportunities. Women have expressed an interest in having more teams, and there are women students participating in club sports for which there are no varsity teams. Those club sports include lacrosse, water polo, ice hockey and bowling — all of which have intercollegiate competitions available and are sanctioned by the athletic governing body the university belongs to. Yet, the university has not added a women’s team for many years.

    Title IX and Athletic Opportunities in Colleges and Universities

    The resource document designed specifically for institutions of higher education dives deeper into background information on Title IX, as well as ways that students, coaches, athletic directors and school officials can evaluate a school’s athletic program and whether it’s meeting its legal requirements to provide equal athletic opportunity. With respect to the evaluation, the document guides readers with questions and examples of Title IX compliance with respect to the benefits, opportunities and treatment for men’s and women’s teams; athletic scholarships and financial assistance, and meeting students’ athletics interests and abilities.

    Benefits, Opportunities and Treatment for Men’s and Women’s Teams

    With respect to equivalent benefits, opportunities and treatment for men’s and women’s teams, the resource document lists several questions about an institution’s attempts to provide equal opportunities to both men and women student-athletes. These questions surround the following topics:

    • Equipment and supplies
    • Scheduling games and practice time
    • Travel and daily allowances
    • Coaching
    • Academic tutors
    • Locker rooms, fields, courts and other facilities for practice and competition
    • Medical and training facilities and services
    • Housing and dining services
    • Publicity
    • Recruitment

    The resource document explicitly states that if any of the questions listed under these topics is answered as a “no,” it may indicate a possible Title IX violation.

    Athletic Scholarships and Financial Assistance

    The document also creates questions that may be used to assess a school’s provision of scholarships and athletic financial assistance. The questions help guide users to measure the percentage of women and men participants at their institution and the percentage of scholarship awards provided to women and men, and it lists questions and examples to help compare these percentages. These questions may again point to disparities among programs that could be potential violations of Title IX, but the OCR states that it “will take into account all legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons for disparities provided by the school” if there are disparities present between percentages awarded to men’s and women’s programs.

    Meeting Students’ Athletic Interests and Capabilities

    The resource document refers to the “three-part test” that institutions may use to demonstrate that all Title IX legal requirements are being fulfilled. Schools are only required to use one of three options to show compliance with Title IX, which are detailed in the document and briefly listed below:

    • Option 1: Substantial Proportionality — This option looks to whether the percentage of women and men participants on athletic teams are about the same as, or “substantially proportionate” to, the percentage of women and men enrolled as full-time undergraduates at your school.
    • Option 2: History and Continuing Practice — This option looks to whether your school can show it has a history and continuing (i.e. present) practice of expanding its athletic program to respond to the interests and abilities of women, if women have been underrepresented, or if men have been underrepresented.
    • Option 3: Interests and Abilities of Students — This option asks whether your school can show that — despite the disproportionality — it is otherwise meeting the interests and abilities of the underrepresented sex.

    The resource document states that following longstanding practice for showing Title IX compliance — if an institution is unable to use any of the three options to show compliance with Title IX — may not be meeting legal requirements to provide equal opportunity to participate in athletics based on sex under Title IX.

    Options for Filing Complaints for Title IX Violations

    Both the general support and higher education-specific documents end their guidance with ways in which students, parents, employees and others in the school community may file Title IX complaints through their school’s grievance procedures if they believe their institution is not providing equal athletic opportunity based on sex. The documents first turn readers to their institution’s Title IX coordinator, but also provides the option to file a complaint online with the OCR. It also clarifies that anyone is able to file complaints with the OCR, which may include individuals outside of the school community.

    CUPA-HR will continue to monitor for any updates to Title IX compliance and will keep members apprised of any updates with respect to Title IX law and regulations.



    Source link

  • Fall 2022 Regulatory Agenda Targets Release Dates for DOL’s Overtime Proposal and Final Title IX Rule – CUPA-HR

    Fall 2022 Regulatory Agenda Targets Release Dates for DOL’s Overtime Proposal and Final Title IX Rule – CUPA-HR

    by CUPA-HR | January 10, 2023

    On January 4, 2023, the Biden administration released the anticipated Fall 2022 Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions (Regulatory Agenda), providing the public with a detailed glimpse into the regulatory and deregulatory activities under development across approximately 67 federal departments, agencies and commissions. Agendas are generally released in the fall and spring and set target dates for each agency and sub-agency’s regulatory actions for the coming year.

    After completing a thorough review of the items included in the Regulatory Agenda, CUPA-HR put together the following list of significant proposed actions for members.

    Department of Labor

    Wage and Hour Division — Defining and Delimiting the Exemptions for Executive, Administrative, Professional, Outside Sales and Computer Employees

    According to the Regulatory Agenda, the Department of Labor (DOL)’s Wage and Hour Division (WHD) is now planning to release a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to address changes to the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)’s overtime pay requirements in May 2023. The WHD first announced their intention to move forward with the NPRM in the Fall 2021 Regulatory Agenda, stating its goal “to update the salary level requirement of the section 13(a)(1) exemption [under the FLSA].”

    As a refresher, changes to overtime pay requirements have been implemented through regulations under both the Obama and Trump administrations. In May 2016, the Obama administration’s DOL issued a final rule increasing the salary threshold from $23,660 to $47,476 per year and imposed automatic updates to the threshold every three years. However, court challenges prevented the rule from taking effect and it was permanently enjoined in September 2017. After the Trump administration started the rulemaking process anew, the DOL issued a new final rule in September 2019 raising the minimum salary level required for exemption from $23,660 annually to $35,568 annually. This final rule went into effect January 1, 2020 and remains in effect today.

    Since the regulation’s reintroduction in the Fall 2021 Regulatory Agenda, CUPA-HR has participated in several DOL listening sessions and has sent letters to the DOL expressing concerns with the timing of the rulemaking. Specifically, our concerns highlight the ongoing challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic and the continued reliance on hybrid and remote work, a historically tight labor market in the U.S. and the effects of inflation on the workforce.

    Wage and Hour Division — Employee or Independent Contractor Classification Under the Fair Labor Standards Act

    In May 2023, the WHD anticipates issuing a final rule to amend the current method for determining independent contractor status for workers.

    On October 13, 2022, the DOL published an NPRM to rescind the current method for determining independent contractor status under the FLSA. The current test finalized by the Trump administration in 2021 has two core factors of control and investment with three additional factors (integration, skill and permanency) that are relevant only if those core factors are in disagreement. The Biden rule proposes a return to a “totality-of-the-circumstances analysis” of multiple factors in an economic reality test, including the following six factors, which are equally weighted with no core provisions:

    • the extent to which the work is integral to the employer’s business;
    • the worker’s opportunity for profit or loss depending on managerial skill;
    • the investments made by the worker and the employer;
    • the worker’s use of skill and initiative;
    • the permanency of the work relationship; and
    • the degree of control exercised or retained by the employer control.

    Employment and Training Administration — Strengthening Wage Protections for the Temporary and Permanent Employment of Certain Aliens in the United States 

    In September 2023, the DOL’s Employment and Training Administration (ETA) plans to issue an NPRM to establish “a new wage methodology for setting prevailing wage levels for H-1B/H-1B1/E-3 and PERM programs consistent with the requirements of the Immigration and Nationality Act.” The proposal will likely amend the Trump administration’s final rule that was scheduled to take effect on November 14, 2022, but was subsequently vacated by a federal court in June 2021. The new proposal will take into consideration the feedback it received in response to a Request for Information (RFI) on data and methods for determining prevailing wage levels “to ensure fair wages and strengthen protections for foreign and U.S. workers.”

    CUPA-HR filed comments in opposition to the Trump administration’s regulations on the issue and in response to the Biden administration’s RFI.

    National Labor Relations Board

    Joint Employer

    In August 2023, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) plans to release its anticipated final rule to amend “the standard for determining whether two employers, as defined under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), are a joint employer under the NLRA.”

    On September 7, 2022, the NLRB issued an NPRM on the joint employer standard. The NPRM establishes joint employer status of two or more employers if they “share or co-determine those matters governing employees’ essential terms and conditions of employment,” such as wages, benefits and other compensation, work and scheduling, hiring and discharge, discipline, workplace health and safety, supervision and assignment and work rules. According to the NLRB’s press release, the Board “proposes to consider both direct evidence of control and evidence of reserved and/or indirect control over these essential terms and conditions of employment when analyzing joint-employer status.”

    Department of Education

    Office for Civil Rights — Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Sex in Education Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance 

    In May 2023, the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) plans to release its highly anticipated Title IX final rule. The rulemaking would finalize the June 2022 NPRM to rollback and replace the Trump administration’s 2020 regulations, specifically with respect to its grievance procedures, while simultaneously expanding protections against sex-based discrimination to cover sexual orientation, gender identity and pregnancy or related conditions.

    CUPA-HR filed comments in September 2022 in response to the NPRM. In our comments, we tried to bring attention to the possible impact the proposed regulations could have on how higher education institutions address employment discrimination. The Department of Education received over 200,000 comments in response to the NPRM, which they must review prior to issuing a final rule to implement their changes.

    In addition to the Title IX rulemaking, the OCR also announced its intention to issue an NPRM to address Title IX protections as it relates to athletics programs at educational institutions. The Department of Education announced its intention to pursue a separate rulemaking to address transgender students participation in athletic programs at institutions of higher education and such protections afforded to them under Title IX after the topic was frequently discussed in the media and in Congress in 2022. According to the Regulatory Agenda, the NPRM was set to be released in December 2022, but it has not yet been released.

    Department of Homeland Security

    U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement — Optional Alternative to the Physical Examination Associated With Employment Eligibility Verification (Form I-9) 

    According to the Regulatory Agenda, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) plans to issue a final rule in May 2023 that would finalize the agency’s proposed rule aiming to “revise employment eligibility verification regulations to allow the Secretary to authorize alternative document examination procedures in certain circumstances or with respect to certain employers.”

    On August 18, 2022, the DHS published its NPRM on optional alternative examination practices for employers when reviewing an individual’s identity and employment authorization documents required by the Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification. If finalized, the proposed rulemaking would create a framework under which the Secretary of Homeland Security could allow alternative options for verifying those documents, such as reviewing the documents via video, fax, or email rather than directly allowing employers and agents to use such alternative examination options. According to the NPRM, the Secretary would be authorized to implement the alternative examination options in a pilot program if they determine such procedures would offer an equivalent level of security, as a temporary measure to address a public health emergency declared by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, or a national emergency declared by the President.

    CUPA-HR filed comments in response to the DHS NPRM in October 2022. The comments were supportive of the Department moving forward with the NPRM, but cautioned against requiring secondary, in-person review of I-9 documents after virtual inspection and once an employee is in-person on a regular and consistent basis; issuing training for document detection and/or anti-discrimination training that may be offered at a high cost without proper vetting, and requiring institutions to be enrolled in E-Verify to participate in the alternative options.

    U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services — Modernizing H-1B Requirements and Oversight and Providing Flexibility in the F-1 Program

    In October 2023, the DHS’s United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) plans to release an NPRM to “amend its regulations governing H-1B specialty occupation workers and F-1 students who are the beneficiaries of timely filed H-1B cap-subject petitions.” The NPRM will specifically propose to “revise the regulations relating to ‘employer-employee relationship’ and provide flexibility for start-up entrepreneurs; implement new requirements and guidelines for site visits including in connection with petitions filed by H-1B dependent employers whose basic business information cannot be validated through commercially available data; provide flexibility on the employment start date listed on the petition (in limited circumstances); address ‘cap-gap’ issues; bolster the H-1B registration process to reduce the possibility of misuse and fraud in the H-1B registration system, and clarify the requirement that an amended or new petition be filed where there are material changes, including by streamlining notification requirements relating to certain worksite changes, among other provisions.”

    Department of Agriculture

    Agriculture Acquisition Regulation: Internal Policy and Procedural Updates and Technical Changes

    In May 2023, the Department of Agriculture (USDA) plans to re-propose an NPRM that was previously issued in February 2022 and included controversial provisions that would require federal contractors on projects procured by the agency to certify their compliance with dozens of federal and state labor laws and executive orders.

    In the February NPRM, the USDA provided only 32 days for stakeholder comment submissions on the proposal. CUPA-HR filed an extension request with the department asking for an additional 90 days to “evaluate the NPRM’s impact on [members’] research missions and collect the information needed in order to provide thoughtful and accurate input to the USDA,” as well as official comments that were pulled from 2012 comments CUPA-HR submitted with the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM).

    While it is unclear whether the May NPRM will include the blacklisting language again, the abstract of the re-proposal states that “the new proposed rule would be responsive to the comments received on our February 2022 proposal.”



    Source link

  • CUPA-HR Submits Comments in Response to Title IX NPRM – CUPA-HR

    CUPA-HR Submits Comments in Response to Title IX NPRM – CUPA-HR

    by CUPA-HR | September 13, 2022

    On September 12, CUPA-HR submitted comments in response to the Department of Education (DOE)’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to amend Title IX. The NPRM seeks to rollback and replace the Trump administration’s 2020 Title IX rule, specifically with respect to its grievance procedures, and establish expanded protections against sex-based discrimination to cover sexual orientation, gender identity and pregnancy or related conditions.

    CUPA-HR filed comments to bring attention to the possible impact the proposed regulations could have on how higher education institutions address employment discrimination. In our comments, we highlight the two sets of grievance procedures promulgated by the proposal: procedures used for cases involving employee-on-employee sex-based harassment (section 106.45) and procedures used for sex-based harassment involving an employee and student, regardless of whether the employee involved is the complainant or respondent (section 106.46). Our comments argue that such procedures in cases where the employee is a respondent may be unnecessarily prescriptive and will interfere with existing obligations, policies and procedures already utilized by institutions that are required to handle such incidents of sex-based employment discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) and state and local employment laws.

    In light of our concerns, our comments ask the DOE to exempt any sex-based harassment of employee respondents against a student complainant from the section 106.46 requirements, and to exempt all sex-based harassment claims where an employee is the respondent, regardless of whether the complainant is a student or an employee, from the section 106.45 requirements. These comments directly align with the concerns and requests written in the American Council on Education’s comments, which CUPA-HR also signed on to.

    Finally, our comments suggest that the DOE consult with other federal agencies with jurisdiction over discrimination law, including the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to rationalize the requirements instituted by the Title IX regulations and Title VII, and to issue joint guidance on how to minimize potential conflicts between the obligations to claimants under Title VII and respondents under Title IX.

    The DOE received over 200,000 comments in response to the NPRM, which they must now review prior to issuing a final rule to implement their changes. It is therefore unclear when we can expect the final rule and effective date of the new regulations. CUPA-HR will keep members apprised of any updates on the Title IX regulations.



    Source link

  • Federal Judge Blocks Department of Education’s Title IX Guidance – CUPA-HR

    Federal Judge Blocks Department of Education’s Title IX Guidance – CUPA-HR

    by CUPA-HR | July 27, 2022

    On July 15, a federal judge from the U.S. District Court of the Eastern District of Tennessee issued a preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of the Department of Education’s Title IX guidance that prohibits discrimination on the basis of gender identity and sexual orientation. Specifically, the ruling blocks enforcement of a June 2021 Notice of Interpretation issued by the department’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) in light of the Supreme Court’s 2020 decision in Bostock v. Clayton County and President Biden’s Executive Order, “Guaranteeing an Educational Environment Free from Discrimination on the Basis of Sex, Including Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity.”

    Twenty Republican-controlled states, led by their attorneys general, were listed as plaintiffs on the case, arguing that the department’s guidance should not be enforced by the agency as it did not go through the notice-and-comment rulemaking process and is not codified law. They claimed that the department’s enforcement of the guidance also puts states at risk of losing significant federal funding if they do not comply with the guidance. The Eastern District of Tennessee judge ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, issuing the preliminary injunction while stating that the guidance interferes with states’ abilities to enforce their own laws that prohibit transgender students from participating on sports teams or using restrooms that align with their gender identity.

    As it currently stands, the injunction applies only to the 20 states listed as plaintiffs in the case, potentially impacting the policies of colleges and universities in those states. Notably, the injunction does not impact the recently issued Title IX proposed regulations that are currently undergoing a 60-day notice-and-comment period. If the Title IX regulations are codified into law, however, they may face similar legal challenges.

    CUPA-HR will continue to monitor this issue and keep members apprised of any developments related to Title IX.



    Source link

  • Department of Education Releases Title IX Proposed Rule – CUPA-HR

    Department of Education Releases Title IX Proposed Rule – CUPA-HR

    by CUPA-HR | June 23, 2022

    On June 23, the Department of Education released the highly anticipated Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to amend Title IX. The NPRM proposes to replace the Trump administration’s 2020 Title IX rule and establishes safeguards for transgender students by proposing a ban on “all forms of sex discrimination, including discrimination based on sex stereotypes, sex characteristics, pregnancy or related conditions, sexual orientation and gender identity.” The proposal will be open for public comment for 60 days following publication in the Federal Register.

    In March 2021, President Biden issued an Executive Order (EO) titled, “Guaranteeing an Educational Environment Free from Discrimination on the Basis of Sex, Including Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity.” The EO directed the secretary of education to evaluate the Trump administration’s Title IX regulations and to “issue new guidance as needed on the implementation of the rule.”

    Of significance, the NPRM proposes to repeal the Trump administration’s requirement for live hearings for Title IX investigations. It also proposes to change the definition of sexual harassment back to “unwelcome sex-based conduct” that creates a hostile environment sufficiently severe or pervasive that it denies or limits a person’s ability to participate in a school’s education program or activity.

    CUPA-HR will be conducting a deeper analysis of the 700-page proposal in the days and weeks to come and will be partnering with other higher education associations to ensure the department receives meaningful feedback on its proposal.

    For additional information on the proposed rule, the department has provided a summary of the major provisions and a fact sheet.



    Source link