Welcome to Labor of Law. Companies face a looming pay-data reporting deadline, following a Washington federal judge's order reinstating an Obama-era rule the Trump administration had put on hold. Plus: a group of state attorneys general are suing the Labor Department over the rollback of a workplace injury-data rule. Scroll down for all the notable moves, and more.

I'm Erin Mulvaney in Washington, covering labor and employment from the Swamp to Silicon Valley. Follow this weekly newsletter. If you have a story idea, feedback or just want to say hi, I'm at [email protected] and on Twitter @erinmulvaney. 

Revised EEO-1 Reinstated—What Now?

Judging on my inbox, everyone's talking about the Washington federal trial court's ruling this week that reinstated the Obama-era EEO-1 pay-data requirement.

The ruling generated quite a few headlines across publications, and even more buzz behind the scenes, and now we're all waiting for what happens next. Will the EEOC push the May 31 deadline? Will the U.S. Justice Department take a quick appeal to the D.C. Circuit?

“Pay data collection is long overdue,” former Obama-era EEOC chair Jenny Yang told me. “We would have had the second year of data by the end of March if there hadn't been a delay in the process.”

Tanya Chutkan

U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan rebuked the Trump administration for staying the rule without sufficient justification. The possibility that Chutkan would reinstate the rule—which requires big employers to provide pay data broken down by gender, race and ethnicity—concerned the government. Justice Department lawyers had warned that such a move would disrupt the expectations of EEO-1 filers. Chutkan said companies have long been on notice the government's stay could be withdrawn at any time.

Business advocates and management-side lawyers are now scrambling to advise clients about what steps to take, and how quickly to move. A company might choose to wait to see if an emergency appeal slows things down, but that could be risky. “I wouldn't wait too long. I'll put it that way,” according to Erin Connell, an employment partner at Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe in San Francisco.

Proskauer Rose partner Guy Brenner told me this week: “No one thought they would have to submit this report and this is not an insignificant burden. I imagine there are a lot of questions being posted and everyone is trying to figure out what this means.”

That sentiment was widely shared among others on the management side. A. Klair Fitzpatrick, a Morgan, Lewis & Bockius employment partner in Philadelphia, said clients were preparing to comply with the changes, even though they believe they impose “burdensome requirements and have the potential to be misused.”

“It's really in an employer's best interest to be proactive before the government asks for data,” Fitzpatrick told me. “We're looking at the bigger picture: What does my employment population look like and where do we have issues? The #MeToo movement and other efforts have propelled employers to focus on these issues.” She added: “I'm not saying it's going to be easy.”

The push for pay data transparency is not a novel concept. Federal, state and local regulations have been proposed in recent years to tackle pay gaps, including encouraging transparency and eliminating the use of prior pay to set compensation. Companies in recent years, in part sparked by the #MeToo movement, have begun to take on pay equity analyses. Google made news this week when it released a pay equity analysis.

The EEOC and Justice Department have been mum on any next steps, or guidance for employers. We're watching for any appeal to the D.C. Circuit. The May 31 deadline might not be set in stone.

“It is likely the OMB will appeal this decision, and the EEOC will revise the reporting guidelines to withstand further judicial scrutiny. Employers should stay abreast of developing news on the EEO-1 ruling and future legal challenges,” a Littler Mendelson team said in an advisory. Things might get interesting in the D.C. Circuit…

Chutkan's ruling took issue with how Trump regulatory czar Neomi Rao handled pausing the pay-data rule, and Rao is the administration's latest pick for the D.C. Circuit. Rao recently cleared a Senate committee, and she's awaiting a confirmation vote.

Rao would be recused if she were confirmed to the court, but the case would present a chance for her new colleagues to judge her actions.

Who Got the Work

A coalition of business groups—including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Center for Workplace Compliance and National Retail Federation—and the bipartisan National Conference of State Legislatures are backing Fort Bend Country, Texas, in a U.S. Supreme Court case involving the exhaustion of administrative remedies at the EEOC. The case is Fort Bend County v. Davis, and the court's set April 22 for oral argument.

Rae Vann of Washington's NT Lakis LLP was counsel of record on the amicus brief for the business groups. Collin Udell of Jackson Lewis was counsel of record for the National Conference of State Legislatures, among other parties on the amicus brief.

“The court should hold that Title VII's exhaustion requirement is jurisdictional so that employees are required to proceed through the EEOC's informal phases of investigation and conciliation,” Udell wrote. “This procedure promotes judicial efficiency and resolution of disputes inexpensively and outside of court.”

In other court action…

>> “A seventh woman has signed onto a proposed $100 million class action accusing Morrison & Foerster of holding back the careers of mothers and pregnant women through unequal pay and promotion opportunities,” according to a report at Law.com. Lawyers at Sanford Heisler Sharp, led by chairman David Sanford, filed a second amended complaint last week in San Francisco federal court. Morrison & Foerster has denied the suit's allegations, which the firm says are baseless and run counter to its actual track record in hiring, supporting and promoting women and working parents, my colleague Scott Flaherty writes. A team from Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher represents the firm.

>> “Hostile work environment claims are cognizable under the Americans with Disability Act, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit found for the first time in an opinion vacating and remanding in part a dismissed ADA claim by a Costco employee,” the New York Law Journal reports. Seyfarth Shaw partner Lorie Almon led the firm's work for Costco. The employee was represented on appeal by Raiser & Kenniff partner Jonathan Tand, who said he and his client were pleased with the outcome. Read the decision here.

Notable Moves & Announcements

>> James McGrath was appointed chair of the litigation department at Seyfarth Shaw. McGrath is a partner based in the firm's Boston office. He is also co-chair of Seyfarth's franchise and distribution counseling and litigation practice group.

>> Mitchell Boyarsky has joined Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough in New York as a partner. He formerly was head of the New York labor and employment practice at Gibbons P.C.

>> Jackson Lewis said C. John Wentzell Jr. has joined the firm's employee benefits practice as a principal in the Greenville, South Carolina, office. Wentzell joins the firm from Ogletree Deakins, where he focused on employee benefits, ERISA and taxation.

>> Greenspoon Marder has appointed partner Myrna Maysonet as the chief diversity officer. Ms. Maysonet joined Greenspoon Marder in 2000 and went on to become the first female partner. She has since served as a mentor to the firm's diversity and even worked to provide same sex benefits a decade before it was considered to become a law.

>> The law firm Paley Rothman, opening in Northern Virginia office, has added three new principals and three associates, Eva Juncker and Lynette Kleiza join the family law practice, and Scott Mirsky joins the employment law team.

Around the Water Cooler

• Trump Labor Dept. Lawyer Sanctioned for 'Bad Judgment' in Litigating Private Suit. A top U.S. Labor Department lawyer who continued to represent a private client in a federal court case against a union was suspended for two weeks without pay last year for exercising “bad judgment,” the agency said. Michael Avakian was formerly the principal member in the Washington office of Atlanta-based Wimberly, Lawson, Steckel, Schneider & Stine before joining the Labor Department in April as associate deputy secretary in the agency's front office. [Law.com]

• News Recent Wins for 401(k) Investors Signal New Class Defense Tactic. “401(k) investors are on a hot streak—in court. Employees who file lawsuits claiming retirement plan mismanagement have notched an impressive string of victories at the class certification stage. Twenty such cases—including those against Northrop Grumman, Franklin Templeton, and Oracle Corp.—have won class action status in recent years, while only two lawsuits saw class certification motions denied, a Bloomberg Law analysis found.” [Bloomberg Law]

• As Uber Prepares to Go Public, Its Lead Lawyer Races to Clean It Up. Uber's top lawyer, Tony West, a former Obama-era Justice Department leader, is preparing to issue a sexual assault transparency report this year. “He is very upfront about the fact that it's not going to be pretty,” Tammy Albarran, Uber's deputy general counsel, said of the transparency report. [NYT]

• Six States Challenge to DOL's Rollback of Workplace Injury Reporting. Six state attorneys general, including leaders from New Jersey and New York, are suing the U.S. Labor Department in Washington's federal district court for halting a rule about workplace injury reporting. [Law.com]

• Democrats Launch Effort to Bar Mandatory Arbitration in Disputes.Congressional Democrats have announced a package of bills that would ban forced arbitration of disputes over employment, consumer and antitrust issues and civil rights disputes. [Law.com]