Arkansas News & Analysis

  • Cumulative injuries lead to substantial award for dump truck driver

    An employee need not be totally disabled to receive substantial workers' compensation benefits in Arkansas. Even conflicting medical testimony can result in a significant award of benefits for a permanent partial impairment.

  • Pain in the back was a reach beyond Walmart employee's grasp

    Arkansas employers frequently see employees trying to overstate their workers' compensation claims to cover injuries that weren't suffered on the job. The following case shows that, as frustrating as this may be, sometimes they overreach and the employer wins.

  • Employers may rely on physician's restrictions in 8th Circuit

    Employers are often faced with a conflict between the restrictions a physician has prescribed for an employee and the worker's contention that he should be allowed to ignore the limits. A recent decision by the U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals (which governs federal cases filed in Arkansas) establishes that you can rely on the physician's prescribed restrictions in determining whether an employee can perform his essential job functions.

  • Asking about retirement plans? Proceed with caution

    Q We have an employee over 60 who stated she is retiring this year, but she hasn't submitted a letter of resignation. We want to determine her plans. What is the best way to ask her about this?

  • Workplace Trends

    Survey finds lack of understanding of when workers will retire. U.S. employers are rethinking their approach to managing the retirement patterns of their workforces, according to a study from Willis Towers Watson. The 2018 Longer Working Careers Survey found that 83% of employers have a significant number of employees at or nearing retirement, but just 53% expressed having a good understanding of when their employees will retire. Additionally, while 81% say managing the timing of their employees' retirements is an important business issue, just 25% do that effectively. The survey found that 80% of respondents view older employees as crucial to their success.

  • For public employers, no employee minimum for coverage under ADEA

    The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA) covers only private employers that have 20 or more employees. The U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled, however, that public employers are covered no matter how few employees they might have.

  • Sometimes, you can have your cake and eat it, too!

    Recently, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit (which governs the federal courts in Arkansas) held that an employer could treat payments to employees as nontaxable expense payments when reporting to the IRS and, simultaneously, as wages for purposes of minimum wage calculations under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).

  • Earning employee trust can reduce your legal liabilities

    "Trust" is a slippery concept. What does it mean for your employees to "trust" you or "distrust" you? And why should you care?

  • Lack of statistics defeats disparate impact claim

    Recently, the 8th Circuit ruled that employees cannot meet the basic requirements of an adverse impact age discrimination claim without supporting statistics showing an actual disparity between older and younger employees.

  • Minimum wage increases heat up the competition for hourly workers

    It's no news to most anyone with experience in federal wage and hour laws that they tend to lag far behind the times. The federal minimum wage—which has stood at $7.25 going on 10 years now—certainly falls into that category. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics' CPI Inflation Calculator, today's equivalent of the 1978 minimum wage (which was $2.65) would be $10.72. According to the nonpartisan Pew Research Center, if the rate had risen at an appropriate pace since 1968, it would be close to $20.