Academic

Faculty Blogs: Warns Institute Day One

The day began with David Leightty's review of Kentucky employment law.  When I was teaching labor law, we were wondering about the rules governing the racetracks in Kentucky since the NLRA declines jurisdiction over tracks.  I learned from the talk that Kentucky has an equivalent protection to Section 7 that applies to the tracks.  Mr. Leightty also discussed an interesting case dealing with a provision, KRS 336.700(2), that prohibits waiver of  "a right or benefit as a condition of employment."  McGown v. Gray Ky. TV, Inc., 2008 Ky. App. LEXIS 342 (Ky. App. 2008) (motion for discretionary review pending).

Next Professor Ken Dau-Schmidt gave the Supreme Court review.  Notable in light of his extensive experience with law and economics, he stated he could find no underlying empirical rationale that explains all the cases this term!  He discussed an interesting (at least to those who will be teaching trusts and estates and employment next year) ERISA case, Kennedy v. Plan Adm'r, 129 S. Ct. 865 (Jan. 26, 2009).  In this case, the court found that a plan administrator acted properly by paying out benefits to a designated beneficiary, even when a divorce decree purported to divest that beneficiary of the benefits.

The session on the Obama legislative agenda focused on the EFCA.  Ross Eisenbrey gave a detailed statistical presentation documenting the recent growth in income inequality, stating that it is "a rise in inequality more dramatic than anything since the gilded age."  Bill Luyre addressed the pros of the act, and Bob Covington made a valiant attempt to raise the cons of the act.  (Yes, I support passage of employee the act.) 

Professor Cynthia Estlund's keynote lecture was a highlight of the day, definitely living up to my  expectations.  We are all looking forward to reading her forthcoming book on Regoverning the Workplace in an Era of Self-Regulation.  Her theme: "No self-regulation without representation."

Next Victoria Lipnic provided a helpful and detailed review of the new FMLA regulations.  She also provided a heads up as to legislation that may be in the works to extend the applicability of the leave's availability to anyone with a deployed family member, not just someone in the guard or reserve, and to clarify that the caregiving provision for veterans would apply for five years after the individual suffered the injury.

Another highlight of the day was Professor Mark Rothstein's talk on GINA.  He posed the question whether GINA was a "foot in the door" or the "one bite in the apple" that means passage of more comprehensive and effective legislation will not be forthcoming soon.  He also noted the need for new technology that would permit health care providers to easily separate out categories of medical information appropriate for disclosure.

The day concluded with Professor Robert Hillman's talk on lawyers leaving firms.  He noted that when a law partnership breaks up, it is often more acrimonious than a typical divorce because there is more money and more ego on the line. 

Full post as published by University of Louisville Law Faculty on June 18, 2009 (boomark / email).