Proxy access is not about giving shareholder’s rights, it is about checking C-suite power so that everyone wins instead of just the CEOs. Proxy access has the potential to address some of the pressing issues with corporate power. Corporate power and influence are concentrated in the board of directors, proxy access gives shareholders the opportunity to infiltrate this exclusive “inner circle” of power. Shareholder access to the board can push change towards greater diversity in the boardroom and demand greater transparency and compliance.
Twelve years after the 164-year-old brokerage firm Lehman Brothers collapsed during the global financial crisis that had been sparked by the subprime mortgage catastrophe, last month the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) adopted a new rule changing parts of the agency’s whistleblower program. The program, which was established by the Dodd-Frank Act in 2010, permits the agency to provide financial awards to whistleblowers who provide it with original information about fraud and securities violations. At issue in this new rule is how the SEC will evaluate and apply its award criteria based on the circumstances in each case. Commissioners voted 3-2 to adopt the final rule – which is effective 30 days after publication in the Federal Register – during their Sept. 23 meeting. The SEC said the new rule was aimed at more efficient claim processing, increased transparency to the structure used by the Commission in determining award amounts and making other changes that reflect the Commission’s experience overseeing the program.
The U.S. Department of Labor (“DOL”) has recently proposed a rule change that would revise its interpretation of “independent contractor” under the Fair Labor Standard Act (“FLSA”). According to DOL, which has the power to investigate worker complaints about misclassifications, this change is needed to promote certainty for stakeholders, reduce litigation, and encourage innovation in the economy. However, this proposed rule could also diminish employee rights because independent contractors have fewer protections under FLSA. This rule widens the scope of who can be considered an independent contractor. Thus, many workers classified as employees could be reclassified as independent contractors and lose protections under FLSA.
The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) Innovation Center (“CMMI”) recently announced a new model for health care providers in rural areas to receive payment from the federal government. The Community Health Access and Rural Transformation (“CHART”) initiative aims to improve rural health care while promoting the Trump Administration’s push to shift health care providers into a more expansive value-based payment model.
Signed by President Obama on March 23, 2010, The Affordable Care Act (“ACA”) provided a monumental change to healthcare. The ACA created access, added provisions to improve quality, and created cost containment measures. However, the ACA created a quintessential question of Federalism. As it exists today, the Supreme Court will listen to oral arguments in November on the constitutionality of the ACA, in California v. Texas. If the Court decides that the ACA is unconstitutional, millions of Americans who are insured under the Act will lose coverage. Additionally, aside from access, the ACA includes regulatory laws such as Section 1557’s nondiscriminatory provisions, and amendments to the False Claims Act & HIPAA.
Whistleblowers are crucial to the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) ability to enforce regulatory standards. Because of their knowledge, they can help the SEC protect investors and capital markets, as well as hold those performing unlawful conduct accountable. Through Section 21F of the Exchange Act the SEC has power to award whistleblowers for the information they provide. Last month, an amendment was added to this section altering the rules of whistleblower award allocations.
On March 16, 2020, Governor JB Pritzker issued Executive Order 2020-07 which, among other things, suspended certain provisions of the Illinois Open Meetings Act (“OMA”), an act which ensures transparency regarding meetings, discussions, and actions taken by public actors concerning public business. The executive order was a response to the practical challenges to compliance with the OMA’s in-person and physical quorum requirements facing local governments as they grapple with restrictions on public gatherings due to the public health threat of COVID-19, declared an emergency in Illinois by Pritzker’s Gubernatorial Disaster Declaration on March 12, 2020. Since March, Pritzker has continued to re-issue and extend COVID-19-related executive orders and the disaster declarations, including the executive actions identified above and their restrictions and suspensions applicable to the OMA, most recently through Executive Order 2020-55 on September 18, 2020. While the suspensions through executive order have provided a temporary solution allowing local governments to comply with the OMA in such an emergency situation, the Illinois legislature took it upon itself to address the issue permanently by amending the OMA statute.
The criminal case against the NFL New England Patriots’ franchise owner, Robert Kraft, has taken an astounding turn of events as the Florida Court of Appeals handed down its ruling on Kraft’s privacy objections against law enforcement’s surveillance video evidence showing the billionaire soliciting prostitution at a local spa. Kraft filed a motion to suppress the evidence arguing that Florida law enforcement’s non-consensual and surreptitious recording of non-audio video surveillance of the premises of a private business, that is open to the public, runs afoul of Kraft’s, and others’, Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable government searches. The ruling of the Appeals Court not only affirmed a similar lower court ruling by the Palm Beach County trial court, favoring Kraft, but it served up an interesting compliance lesson on the privacy protections required of law enforcement during their surreptitious video surveillance operations.
Patrick Gilsenan Associate Editor Loyola University Chicago School of Law, Weekend JD 2023 Americans looking for relief and regulatory protections in the face of an eviction and foreclosure crisis have been met with a patchwork system of confusing, temporary, and difficult to navigate government programs. The eviction ban established by the CARES Act has expired, …
As thousands of schools across the country comply with state and local social distancing orders due to the global pandemic COVID-19 for this 2020-21 school year, many schools are now faced with having to educate students from their homes in either hybrid or fully remote models. Millions of students are now utilizing online educational services to aid in remote learning. Although these education technology companies (“EdTech”) are now providing crucial remote learning opportunities for students, school districts must also keep students’ privacy rights in mind. Many of these EdTech services will collect and use personal information of students who use their services. This is where the Federal Trade Commission’s Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (“COPPA”) pertains.