Federal Updates | Court Cases Impacting Manufacturers and Other Employers

The following updates are provided in cooperation with our national allies at NAM.

NAM Calls on Court to Protect Spousal Work Permits.  The NAM, along with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and Information Technology Industry Council, is calling on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to protect H-4 work permits for spouses of certain H-1B visa holders. The groups filed an amicus brief with the court this week. The H-4 work permit rule faces a challenge in court from Save Jobs USA, a group of former IT workers, as well as a challenge from the administration as the Department of Homeland Security plans to rescind the rule. Ending work permits for H-4 spouses would rapidly remove 91,000 individuals from the American workforce, negatively impact the H-1B visa program and reduce companies’ ability to recruit top talent in the future. The NAM is advocating for these H-4 spouses in the administration and the courts. Click here for a Shopfloor blog post making the economic case for H-4 work permits, and read more about the NAM’s comprehensive immigration proposal, “A Way Forward,” here.

EEO-1 Update: NAM Fights Ruling that Could Cost Manufacturers Millions.  NAM has urged the D.C. District Court to consider the high cost of requiring manufacturers to submit unnecessary pay data information to the EEOC after a federal judge, in late March, struck down (link court opinion) the government’s stay of the collection. The EEO-1 Pay Data Collection requires employers to submit employment data to the EEOC categorized by race/ethnicity, gender, and job category. The specific portion of the EEO-1 at issue in the litigation focuses on pay data, which the EEOC itself publicly admits it is “not capable of collecting.” The government filed a response to the court explaining that any collection without proper lead time and infrastructure will result in poor quality data in addition to increased compliance costs. NAM, along with other business associations, also filed an amicus brief that makes it clear to the court that collecting this pay data for 2018 would be unduly burdensome on manufacturers and would require extensive money, time and training if the collection is to be accurate or useful.