Kastner Westman & Wilkins is committed to helping organizations build the solid foundations they need for effectively managing human resources. KWW’s practice is limited to representing management exclusively in the full range of workplace issues – labor and employment law, workers’ compensation, employee benefits, and human resources consulting.
Our goal is to help clients manage and solve problems when they arise, but also to provide strategic, proactive counsel designed to prevent problems from developing in the first place.
For more information or to contact one of our professionals, please see our Contact page or e-mail us at kww@kwwlaborlaw.com.
Listen to our podcast on our Resources page.
By James P. Wilkins, Esq.
On December 9, the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (“OFCCP”) issued a Proposed Rule that would radically change the affirmative action obligations of federal contractors and subcontractors with respect to recruitment, hiring and retention of individuals with disabilities.
Who’s Covered? Section 503 of the federal Rehabilitation Act prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of disability by all federal contractors and subcontractors who have contracts or subcontracts in excess of $10,000 for the purchase, sale, or use of personal property or nonpersonal services. It also requires covered federal contractors and subcontractors who have a contract or subcontract of $50,000 or more and 50 or more employees to prepare and maintain an affirmative action program designed to assure the hiring and advancement of qualified individuals with disabilities.
If you are a covered federal contractor or subcontractor, please read on to learn more about these proposed changes.
posted on Dec 16, 2011
Please join us in welcoming Julie A. Trout as Kastner Westman & Wilkins' latest associate.
Julie grew up in Greater Akron and is a recent summa cum laude graduate of the University of Akron School of Law. While at Akron, she was a member of the Akron Law Review and a Beatrice and C. Blake McDowell Scholar. She also earned the Ernest Karam Award for Academic Excellence and the National Association of Women Lawyers Award.
posted on Nov 28, 2011
By Keith Pryatel
On April 27, 2011, the United States Supreme Court, by a narrow 5-4 majority, once again decided that the Federal Arbitration Act is the Congressionally-dictated, favorable way of resolving plaintiff/defendant disputes (AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion). Although issued in the consumer, cellular telephone setting, there is little doubt that the Court’s decision will have equal application in employment-related disputes.
posted on May 10, 2011
By Kenneth M. Haneline
Budget Bill Reverses IRS Form 1099 Changes and “Voucher” Program under Health Reform
posted on May 10, 2011
By James P. Wilkins
How often does it happen that a new development in public sector collective bargaining law is so newsworthy that it makes the front page of the Wall Street Journal, the Akron Beacon Journal and the Cleveland Plain Dealer all on the same day. Such a confluence of stories occurred on February 18.
What’s generating all this media attention? For the most part, it is organized labor’s vehement reaction to dramatic initiatives by newly-elected governors and legislators in Ohio and elsewhere to curtail the bargaining power of public sector labor unions. Significant changes in public sector bargaining laws are pending in Ohio, Wisconsin, and Indiana, among others.
In Ohio, the target of organized labor’s wrath is Sub. S.B. No. 5, which was introduced in the Ohio Senate on February 9th. It is far too early in the legislative process to know whether this bill will be enacted in whole or in substantial part. A review of the legislation suggests that its drafters may have attempted to stake out an extreme position, knowing full well that political pressure from organized labor and legislative maneuvering by Democrats in the General Assembly will require that compromises be made during the legislative process.
posted on Feb 26, 2011
Prospective Client Conflicts
NOTICE: Although we would like to hear from you, we cannot do so until we know that doing so will not create a conflict of interest. Also, we cannot treat unsolicited information as confidential.
By clicking the “ACCEPT” button you agree that we may review any information that you transmit to us. You acknowledge that our review of your information, even if you consider it confidential, does not preclude us from representing another client directly adverse to you, even in a matter where that information could be used against you.