Robinson Cole LLP
High Contrast Mode

Abby M. Warren represents employers in labor and employment matters. She focuses her practice on counseling private sector employers, including multinational corporations, health care organizations, educational institutions, and manufacturers, in all areas of employment law. Abby also defends employers in federal and state court and before administrative agencies. In addition to counseling and litigation, she provides workplace training for clients and conducts workplace investigations. She is a member of our firm's Labor, Employment, Benefits, Immigration + Tax group.

Employment Counseling, Compliance, + Training

Abby counsels employers and human resource professionals in all areas of employment law, including discharge and discrimination issues, workplace investigations, affirmative action compliance, employee discipline, wage and hour issues, disability and reasonable accommodation, family and medical leave, unemployment, employment and independent contractor agreements, severance and separation agreements, individual terminations and reductions in force, and workplace health and safety issues. She also negotiates and drafts employment and separation agreements on behalf of clients, in addition to reviewing and revising employee handbooks and personnel policies. She also conducts training sessions on a myriad of employment issues, including topics such as sexual harassment, workplace civility, and avoiding discrimination claims.

Employment Litigation + Administrative Advocacy

Abby regularly defends employers in discrimination, leave, harassment, and a wide range of labor and employment matters. She represents clients in matters from inception to trial and through appeal in federal and state courts.

She represents clients in administrative agency matters before the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the Department of Labor, the National Labor Relations Board, the U.S. Department of Justice, the Office of Federal Contract and Compliance Programs, and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Abby represents clients at private and public arbitration hearings and in alternative dispute resolution and mediation sessions with federal, state, and private mediators.

Workplace Investigations

As an Association of Workplace Investigators Certificate Holder, Abby is a trained workplace investigator, and she regularly conducts, manages, and provides advice regarding workplace investigations involving all types of employment-related issues, including sexual harassment, ethics, interpersonal conflicts, and workplace misconduct.

Labor Relations + Union Avoidance

Abby represents employers in matters before the National Labor Relations Board, such as unfair labor practice charges and representation petitions. She has provided training on labor issues to supervisors and provided advice and strategy related to union avoidance. She also represents employers in arbitrations arising from collective bargaining agreements.

Pro Bono

Abby performs pro bono work on behalf of Connecticut non-profit organizations through the Pro Bono Partnership. She serves as a trusted advisor to non-profit organizations with labor and employment issues, including assisting with wage and hour matters, executive transitions, and handbook and policy development.

She regularly writes and presents on employment and labor-related matters, often focusing on the impact of key court decisions and compliance issues. Abby has been a contributing editor to The Developing Labor Law for several years and is an active author for our firm's Manufacturing Law Blog. Prior to entering private practice, she served as a clerk in the New Haven Superior Court to judges in both the civil and criminal divisions.

  • Pennsylvania State University, Dickinson School of Law (Juris Doctor, cum laude)
    • Woolsack Honor Society
  • Southern Connecticut State University  (Bachelors, summa cum laude)
    • B.S., International Business Management

  • State of Connecticut
  • State of New Jersey
  • State of New York
  • Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
  • U.S. District Court, District of Connecticut
  • U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey
  • Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Court

Selected by her peers for inclusion in The Best Lawyers in America© in the area of Employment Law - Management since 2021

Selected to the Connecticut Super Lawyers list from 2022 to 2025

Named a Connecticut Law Tribune 2019 "New Leader in the Law"

Selected as a Rising Star to the Connecticut Super Lawyers list from 2017 to 2020

Millennial Move Maker 2015 Award presented by the Greater New Haven Chamber of Commerce

Robinson+Cole Mentor of the Year, 2022

Hartford Business Journal, 2023 "Forty Under 40" Honoree  

American Bar Association

American Bar Foundation
Fellow

Connecticut Bar Association

Connecticut Bar Foundation
James W. Cooper Fellow

Human Resource Association of Central Connecticut

Society for Human Resource Management

Association of Workplace Investigators
Certificate Holder

Connecticut Judicial Branch
Member, State Bar Examining Committee (2019 - present)

Connecticut Women's Council
Member (2020 - present)

Greater New Haven Chamber of Commerce
Past Chairperson, Human Resources Steering Committee

Connecticut Women's Hall of Fame
Board of Trustees
Co-chair, Nominating and Governance Committee

Experience


Wage + Hour Compliance Issue

Assisted national company in wage and hour compliance issue involving payroll deductions including creating a nationwide program and strategy.

Workplace Complaints

Supervised investigation of a number of workplace complaints received by a company regarding finance, discrimination, harassment, and other issues.

Constitutional Claims Against Municipality

Secured dismissal of two separate actions alleging Constitutional claims against a municipality.



Publications


New York State and New York City Labor and Employment Law Updates teaser
February 4, 2026

New York State and New York City Labor and Employment Law Updates

January 29, 2026

2026 Labor and Employment Outlook for Manufacturers

Industry Today

Labor + Employment group lawyers Abby M. Warren and Christopher A. Costain highlighted five significant labor and employment law related trends for 2026, including generative artificial intelligence and non-compete agreements. The authors suggest that as non-compete statutes “…continue to expand at the state level, manufacturers should review their non-compete agreements and avoid using broad restrictions, instead developing and implementing narrowly tailored provisions that protect a specific, articulable business interest and are compliant with applicable state law.” Read the article.

Legal Update: Massachusetts and Rhode Island Labor and Employment Law Updates teaser
January 29, 2026

Legal Update: Massachusetts and Rhode Island Labor and Employment Law Updates

New York State and New York City Labor and Employment Law Updates teaser
February 4, 2026

New York State and New York City Labor and Employment Law Updates

January 29, 2026

2026 Labor and Employment Outlook for Manufacturers

Industry Today

Labor + Employment group lawyers Abby M. Warren and Christopher A. Costain highlighted five significant labor and employment law related trends for 2026, including generative artificial intelligence and non-compete agreements. The authors suggest that as non-compete statutes “…continue to expand at the state level, manufacturers should review their non-compete agreements and avoid using broad restrictions, instead developing and implementing narrowly tailored provisions that protect a specific, articulable business interest and are compliant with applicable state law.” Read the article.

Legal Update: Massachusetts and Rhode Island Labor and Employment Law Updates teaser
January 29, 2026

Legal Update: Massachusetts and Rhode Island Labor and Employment Law Updates

Legal Update: Ready for Change? 2025 Labor and Employment Law Updates for Connecticut Unpacked teaser
December 11, 2025

Legal Update: Ready for Change? 2025 Labor and Employment Law Updates for Connecticut Unpacked

November 6, 2025

How Wearable Technology Creates Legal Risks for Manufacturers

Maufacturing.net

Abby and Chris focus on the legal risks manufacturers may face by requiring workers to use wearable technologies at work. Wearable technologies are “smart devices” such as helmets, vests or ergonomic sensors that collect and transmit information, and perform important efficiency and safety-focused functions. These technologies raise various privacy, surveillance and security concerns relating to the collection, monitoring and storage of employee biometric information. Read the article.

Legal Update: DOL Proposes to Expand Availability of Companionship and Live-In Domestic Service FLSA Exemptions teaser
July 10, 2025

Legal Update: DOL Proposes to Expand Availability of Companionship and Live-In Domestic Service FLSA Exemptions

Legal Update: Recent Executive Orders: What Employers Need to Know to Assess the Shifting Sands teaser
February 18, 2025

Legal Update: Recent Executive Orders: What Employers Need to Know to Assess the Shifting Sands

January 31, 2025

Federal Labor & Employment Trends Likely Coming in 2025

Industry Today

As the new administration gets underway, Abby and Chris acknowledge that manufacturers may be impacted by a number of significant changes to the federal labor and employment law landscape in 2025 and in the years ahead. To ensure they remain in compliance, manufacturers may want to follow developments in areas including EEO-1 reporting requirements, labor law, worker classification, among other changes. Read the article.

Legal Update: Ring in the New Year with New York and New York City Employment Law Updates teaser
December 19, 2024

Legal Update: Ring in the New Year with New York and New York City Employment Law Updates



Legal Update: Ready for Change? 2025 Labor and Employment Law Updates for Connecticut Unpacked teaser
December 11, 2025

Legal Update: Ready for Change? 2025 Labor and Employment Law Updates for Connecticut Unpacked

November 6, 2025

How Wearable Technology Creates Legal Risks for Manufacturers

Maufacturing.net

Abby and Chris focus on the legal risks manufacturers may face by requiring workers to use wearable technologies at work. Wearable technologies are “smart devices” such as helmets, vests or ergonomic sensors that collect and transmit information, and perform important efficiency and safety-focused functions. These technologies raise various privacy, surveillance and security concerns relating to the collection, monitoring and storage of employee biometric information. Read the article.

Legal Update: DOL Proposes to Expand Availability of Companionship and Live-In Domestic Service FLSA Exemptions teaser
July 10, 2025

Legal Update: DOL Proposes to Expand Availability of Companionship and Live-In Domestic Service FLSA Exemptions

Legal Update: Recent Executive Orders: What Employers Need to Know to Assess the Shifting Sands teaser
February 18, 2025

Legal Update: Recent Executive Orders: What Employers Need to Know to Assess the Shifting Sands

January 31, 2025

Federal Labor & Employment Trends Likely Coming in 2025

Industry Today

As the new administration gets underway, Abby and Chris acknowledge that manufacturers may be impacted by a number of significant changes to the federal labor and employment law landscape in 2025 and in the years ahead. To ensure they remain in compliance, manufacturers may want to follow developments in areas including EEO-1 reporting requirements, labor law, worker classification, among other changes. Read the article.

Legal Update: Ring in the New Year with New York and New York City Employment Law Updates teaser
December 19, 2024

Legal Update: Ring in the New Year with New York and New York City Employment Law Updates


Events


Past

A State & Federal Legislative Update for Employers

Jun 16 2026
OneDigital’s Compliance & Coffee Seminar Series
Past

A State & Federal Legislative Update for CT Employers

Apr 28 2026
OneDigital’s Compliance & Coffee Seminar Series
Past

A State & Federal Legislative Update for Employers

Jun 16 2026
OneDigital’s Compliance & Coffee Seminar Series
Past

A State & Federal Legislative Update for CT Employers

Apr 28 2026
OneDigital’s Compliance & Coffee Seminar Series
Past

The Show Must Go On: HR’s High-Wire Act When Leadership Implodes

Apr 22 2026
2026 Tri-State SHRM Conference: HR Under the Big Top
Past

Policy and Compliance Update

Mar 26 2026
Women in Manufacturing (WiM) HR Roundtable
Past

Legal Brief

Mar 19 2026
“Benefits Madness,” hosted by MP: Hired for HR and SFP Wealth
Past

Employment Law Updates for 2026

Jan 15 2026
Webinar
Past

The Show Must Go On: HR’s High-Wire Act When Leadership Implodes

Apr 22 2026
2026 Tri-State SHRM Conference: HR Under the Big Top
Past

Policy and Compliance Update

Mar 26 2026
Women in Manufacturing (WiM) HR Roundtable
Past

Legal Brief

Mar 19 2026
“Benefits Madness,” hosted by MP: Hired for HR and SFP Wealth
Past

Employment Law Updates for 2026

Jan 15 2026
Webinar

News


February 3, 2026

Abby Warren and Christopher Costain Signal AI and Non-Compete Agreements Should Be On Manufacturers’ Radar in 2026

In their article for Industry Today published on January 29, 2026, Abby and Chris highlight five significant labor and employment law related trends for 2026, including generative artificial intelligence and non-compete agreements. The authors suggest that as non-compete statutes “…continue to expand at the state level, manufacturers should review their non-compete agreements and avoid using broad restrictions, instead developing and implementing narrowly tailored provisions that protect a specific, articulable business interest and are compliant with applicable state law.” Read the article.

Industry Today
December 1, 2025

Robinson+Cole Advances Innovation as First Am Law 200 Firm to Partner with Newcode.ai in United States

Firm showcases innovative agentic AI solution in firmwide program with Newcode.ai CEO Maged Helmy
Robinson+Cole Advances Innovation as First Am Law 200 Firm to Partner with Newcode.ai in United States teaser
November 13, 2025

Abby Warren and Christopher Costain Examine Potential Implications of Wearable Technology

Maufacturing.net
February 3, 2026

Abby Warren and Christopher Costain Signal AI and Non-Compete Agreements Should Be On Manufacturers’ Radar in 2026

In their article for Industry Today published on January 29, 2026, Abby and Chris highlight five significant labor and employment law related trends for 2026, including generative artificial intelligence and non-compete agreements. The authors suggest that as non-compete statutes “…continue to expand at the state level, manufacturers should review their non-compete agreements and avoid using broad restrictions, instead developing and implementing narrowly tailored provisions that protect a specific, articulable business interest and are compliant with applicable state law.” Read the article.

Industry Today
December 1, 2025

Robinson+Cole Advances Innovation as First Am Law 200 Firm to Partner with Newcode.ai in United States

Firm showcases innovative agentic AI solution in firmwide program with Newcode.ai CEO Maged Helmy
Robinson+Cole Advances Innovation as First Am Law 200 Firm to Partner with Newcode.ai in United States teaser
November 13, 2025

Abby Warren and Christopher Costain Examine Potential Implications of Wearable Technology

Maufacturing.net
November 6, 2025

Robinson+Cole Commends 62 Attorneys Recognized in 2025 Super Lawyers®

Recognition spans key regions and highlights the firm’s seasoned practitioners and emerging leaders in many business transactions and litigation practices
Robinson+Cole Commends 62 Attorneys Recognized in 2025 <i>Super Lawyers</i>® teaser
August 26, 2025

78 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2026

Firm receives top listing in Connecticut lawyer count in national peer review survey
78 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2026 teaser
February 6, 2025

Abby Warren and Christopher Costain Co-Author Article on Federal Labor & Employment Trends in 2025

Industry Today
November 4, 2024

Abby Warren and Jessica Pinto Co-Author Article on New DOL Rule Impacting Restaurant Industry

Modern Restaurant Management
October 31, 2024

Robinson+Cole Lawyers Recognized in 2024 Super Lawyers®

Thomson Reuters
Robinson+Cole Lawyers Recognized in 2024 <i>Super Lawyers</i>® teaser
September 12, 2024

Abby Warren and Christopher Costain Co-Author Article for Nation’s Restaurant News on Spread of Cyberbullying in the Restaurant Industry


November 6, 2025

Robinson+Cole Commends 62 Attorneys Recognized in 2025 Super Lawyers®

Recognition spans key regions and highlights the firm’s seasoned practitioners and emerging leaders in many business transactions and litigation practices
Robinson+Cole Commends 62 Attorneys Recognized in 2025 <i>Super Lawyers</i>® teaser
August 26, 2025

78 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2026

Firm receives top listing in Connecticut lawyer count in national peer review survey
78 Robinson+Cole Lawyers Listed in The Best Lawyers in America© 2026 teaser
February 6, 2025

Abby Warren and Christopher Costain Co-Author Article on Federal Labor & Employment Trends in 2025

Industry Today
November 4, 2024

Abby Warren and Jessica Pinto Co-Author Article on New DOL Rule Impacting Restaurant Industry

Modern Restaurant Management
October 31, 2024

Robinson+Cole Lawyers Recognized in 2024 Super Lawyers®

Thomson Reuters
Robinson+Cole Lawyers Recognized in 2024 <i>Super Lawyers</i>® teaser
September 12, 2024

Abby Warren and Christopher Costain Co-Author Article for Nation’s Restaurant News on Spread of Cyberbullying in the Restaurant Industry


Manufacturing Law Blog


Below is an excerpt of Manufacturing Law Blog posts authored by Abby.

Quota Control: Connecticut’s New Warehouse Law Has Manufacturing Impact

By Abby Warren and Guest Contributor This article was co-authored by Labor + Employment group lawyer, Christopher Costain. In March 2026, a Connecticut bill was signed into law which sets new compliance standards for large warehouse employers that use production quotas and related metrics in assessing worker performance. Once the law goes into effect on July 1, 2026, Connecticut will become the sixth state in the country to have enacted such a law, joining California, Minnesota, New York, Oregon, and Washington. For large manufacturers, the new law will significantly impact how employee performance is tracked. Who Is Covered The law defines “employer” as any commercial entity that, at any time in the prior 12 months: Employs 250 or more employees at a single warehouse distribution center in Connecticut; or Employs 1,000 or more employees at one or more warehouse distribution centers in Connecticut.  Notably, the employee headcount thresholds include workers who are employed indirectly, such as through a third-party employer or temporary staffing service or agency. Covered employees are those workers who are non-exempt from the minimum wage and overtime requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, as amended. The law applies only to employers that operate “warehouse distribution centers,” which is defined as a warehouse or warehouse complex as contained within certain North American Industry Classification Systems Codes related to warehousing and storage, merchant wholesalers, e-commerce and mail-order merchants, couriers and delivery services, and warehouse retail establishments. Covered Quotas & Performance Standards When the law goes into effect, covered employers will be required to disclose information to workers regarding quota and work speed data performance standards. A “quota” is defined as a work performance standard under which: An employee is assigned or required to perform at a specific productivity speed, or complete a certain number of tasks, or produce a certain amount of material within a defined time period; An employee’s time spent performing tasks when a defined time period is measured, recorded, or tallied; or An employee’s performance is ranked in relation to the performance of other employees. The law also defines “work speed data” as the specific metrics collected by an employer indicating the amount of tasks performed or materials handled or produced by an employee within a period of time, and whether any amount of that time was spent not performing tasks or handling materials. Quota Disclosure & Recordkeeping Obligations The law includes several key compliance obligations for covered employers, including quota information disclosure and recordkeeping requirements: No later than August 1, 2026, for current employees, or at the time of hiring for new employees, covered employers must provide a written description of each quota to which the employee is subject, including any potential adverse employment action that may result from a failure to satisfy such quota; If a covered employer changes a quota, it must notify all employees subject to that quota before the new quota goes into effect, in addition to providing a written description of the new quota no later than two business days after the change is made; and Covered employers must maintain records of each employee’s work speed data, the aggregated work speed data for similar employees at the same warehouse distribution center, and written descriptions of quotas provided to employees, for three years.  Importantly, employers that do not assign or require quotas are not required to preserve any of the records required under the law. Employee Requests for Quota Information Under the law, current and former employees may request the following information from their employer or former employer, which must be provided within ten calendar days of receipt of such request, if the employee or former employee believes a quota violates the law: A written description of each quota to which the employee is/was subject; A copy of the employee’s personal work speed data for the prior 90 days/the 90 days prior to the employee’s separation from employment; and A copy of the aggregated work speed data for similar employees at the same warehouse distribution center for the prior 90 days/the 90 days prior to the employee’s separation from employment. Permissible Quotas & Quota Restrictions The law also prohibits employers from implementing any quotas that: Prevent compliance with meal period requirements under Connecticut law; Interfere with the use of bathroom facilities, including travel time to and from such facilities; Measure an employee’s performance over a period of time that is shorter than the employee’s workday; or Set a performance standard that is based solely on ranking the employee’s performance in relation to the performance of other employees. Anti-Retaliation & Penalties Employers are prohibited from (1) discharging, retaliating or discriminating against, or (2) taking any adverse employment action against, any employee or former employee for requesting information related to quotas to which they are subject. The law also establishes a presumption of retaliation for adverse employment actions taken within 90 days of protected activity. The presumption of retaliation can be rebutted by clear and convincing evidence that the adverse employment action was taken for a permissible reason or that the employee’s engagement in protected activity was not a motivating factor in the employer’s decision to take such adverse action. Employees, or the Attorney General (on behalf of a group of employees), may bring an action in the Superior Court to recover damages, injunctive relief, and attorneys’ fees. Additionally, employers that violate the law will be assessed a civil penalty of $1,000 for a first violation, $2,000 for a second violation, and $3,000 for a third or any subsequent violation. Key Takeaways for Manufacturers Manufacturers who may be covered under this new law should review all existing quotas and work speed data metrics to ensure they do not violate the law (such as interfering with meal periods or monitoring employee performance for a period of time that is shorter than the employee’s workday), and ensure that records are being preserved in compliance with the law. Manufacturers should also determine whether existing quota systems are supported by written policies or descriptions, and prepare quota disclosure notices prior to the August 1, 2026, deadline. In all cases, manufacturers should consult competent employment counsel for assistance with ensuring compliance with the new law and other important employment law issues. 

Visit Blog

Driving Home the Point – Accommodating Employee Commutes

By Abby Warren and Guest Contributor This post was co-authored by Labor + Employment Group lawyer Christopher Costain. While employers are typically aware of their obligations to engage in the interactive process in response to reasonable accommodation requests due to disability under federal and state law, employers may not be aware of one specific accommodation request that may be on the rise of late – commuting accommodations. For example, an employee may request to work remotely or under a hybrid schedule based on a medical condition. While such accommodations may be typically associated with remote or hybrid work schedule arrangements, employers may receive other requests such as changes to work schedule or hours among others. Therefore, the question remains – are employers required to accommodate requests related to their daily commute? Commuting Accommodations Under the ADA and Equivalent State Law Whether an employer must provide a reasonable accommodation to an employee with a disability in connection with their commute to work under applicable law is a legal issue that has evolved in recent years. Historically, an employee’s length and means of commute were considered outside the employer’s control and therefore, typically, employers were not required to provide reasonable accommodations with regard to employee commutes. However, court decisions in recent years, especially after COVID-19, have held that, in certain circumstances, employers may have an obligation to accommodate an employee in relation to their commute. Recent Nationwide Court Decisions and Federal Agency Guidance In 2023, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held, in EEOC v. Charter Communications, 75 F.4th 729 (7th Cir. 2023), that the employer was required to provide a schedule accommodation to an employee who experienced difficulty driving at night due to a vision impairment. The Charter Court found that, because the employee’s disability substantially interfered with his ability to travel to and from work, and because commuting to work was a prerequisite to the essential job function of attendance, the employee was entitled to a work schedule accommodation that would allow him to drive only during the daytime. The court also took note of the fact that the employee experienced difficulty in accessing the workplace because of their work schedule, over which the employer had control as it related to scheduling the employee for shifts throughout the week. The court distinguished the plaintiff’s need for a commute accommodation from other cases in which employees were not entitled to accommodations based on the fact that they lived far from the workplace, a variable that was within the employee’s control. The federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission issued guidance in February 2026 reiterating  the Charter Court’s holding, providing that employers may be required to consider flexible work schedules to enable a qualified employee with a disability to effectively accomplish their commute and access the workplace.  Additionally, in 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held, in Tudor v. Whitehall Central School District, 132 F.4th242 (2d Cir. 2025), that employees may be entitled to a reasonable accommodation even if they are able to perform their essential job functions without an accommodation. Therefore, the fact that an employee is able to perform their essential job functions once they arrive at the workplace and irrespective of their commute, does not foreclose the possibility that they may be entitled to a commuting accommodation, such as a schedule adjustment so the employee may use public transportation or drive during the daytime, to allow them to get to and from work with less difficulty. Key Takeaways for Evaluating Requests for Commute Accommodations In all cases, the employee’s requested commute accommodation must be: 1) reasonable; 2) related to the employee’s ability to perform their essential job functions (as opposed to simply providing a personal benefit to the employee or eliminating a perceived inconvenience to the employee); 3) it cannot eliminate an employee’s essential job function; and 4) it cannot pose an undue hardship on the employer. Manufacturers should also consider the nature of the employee’s difficulty in commuting to work, including whether the employee or the employer have control over the variables that are causing that difficulty.  In addition to engaging in the interactive process with employees who request reasonable accommodations, manufacturers should ensure that requests for reasonable accommodations are reviewed carefully by human resources professionals, that employees are asked to clarify the nature of their request when necessary, and that employees provide sufficient medical documentation to support their request. Although employees decide where and how far away from the workplace they live, employers decide how to manage the schedule and should be prepared to review employee requests for commuting accommodations with these key legal principles in mind. Manufacturers should also consult competent employment counsel for assistance with ensuring compliance with federal and state anti-discrimination laws and other important employment law issues. 

Visit Blog

Reminder – Managing Leave During Flu Season

By Abby Warren and Guest Contributor This post was co-authored by Labor + Employment Group lawyer Christopher Costain. Flu season, which extends into spring, can be a particularly long season for manufacturers, especially when their workforces and workplaces are significantly impacted by the illness. Below are reminders for manufacturers about the various legal implications related to the flu and its impact on the workplace.  Paid Sick Leave Employees who contract the flu without significant medical complications may be able to use accrued paid sick leave under the law and under an employer’s policy to cover time off to seek medical treatment or to rest and recover. Many states and localities have implemented paid sick leave programs in recent years requiring employers to provide paid sick leave to employees in connection with their own illnesses in addition to providing care to family members. In addition to the new paid sick leave laws, existing laws continue to develop, expanding the qualifying reasons for the permitted use of leave and the definitions of family members who are covered by the law. Manufacturers should stay up to date with applicable paid sick leave laws and ensure compliance with changing requirements as employees seek to use their accrued leave to recover during flu season. Family and Medical Leave Although the flu generally does not trigger protections under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) or its state equivalents, employees may be entitled to job-protected leave if they, or their covered family member, are suffering from a particularly severe case. Specifically, cases of the flu that involve medical complications may trigger FMLA protections if they constitute a “serious health condition,” meaning they involve either inpatient care or continuing treatment by a healthcare provider. Where the flu and related medical complications incapacitate an employee for more than three calendar days and require a course of continuing treatment, the employee may be entitled to leave under the FMLA. In reviewing employee requests for leave in connection with the flu, manufacturers should be aware that mere communications between an employee and a healthcare provider, such as communications through a provider messaging portal or by telephone or email, generally do not constitute continuing treatment under the FMLA. Additionally, manufacturers should keep in mind that they may require employees to submit a certification from a healthcare provider supporting the need for FMLA leave.  Reasonable Accommodations Generally, short-term illnesses such as the flu and the common cold are not considered disabilities under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and therefore do not entitle an employee to leave as a reasonable accommodation. However, short-term or temporary conditions that are sufficiently severe or involve complications may meet the definition of “disability” under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) by substantially limiting one or more of the employee’s major life activities. In such rare cases, and to the extent an employee is not otherwise eligible for or has exhausted their available job-protected leave under the federal or state FMLA, employees may be eligible for leave as an accommodation under the ADA. In such cases in which an employee not otherwise eligible for leave under the FMLA requests leave as an accommodation under the ADA, manufacturers should engage in the interactive process to determine whether an accommodation is necessary. Managing Leave and Time Off During Flu Season As the 2026 flu season continues to impact business operations throughout winter and into  spring, manufacturers should ensure that managers are managing employee absence and leave consistent with their policies on attendance, absences, leave, and time off, as well as applicable law. Managers should be reminded to confer with Human Resources about these issues before taking action, to ensure such actions are consistent with the law and relevant policies. In addition, employers who suspect that there may be employee abuse of their time-off and leave policies should consult competent legal counsel to address these issues.

Visit Blog

2026 Labor and Employment Outlook for Manufacturers

By Abby Warren and Guest Contributor This post was co-authored by Labor + Employment Group lawyer Christopher Costain. As we look ahead to 2026, several significant employment law developments and trends are on the horizon, especially with regard to local and state laws. Below are a few key issues likely to impact manufacturers in 2026: Regulation of the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Employment Employers, including human resource professionals, are increasingly turning to generative artificial intelligence (AI) to help sort applicant and employee data and make employment decisions, including related to screening and hiring. Although AI has increased efficiency in these processes, employers must ensure compliance with rapidly evolving state laws, some of which require employers to prepare risk assessments related to the use of AI in employment decision-making, provide pre-use notices to affected individuals, and provide opt-out rights. In addition to the burgeoning patchwork of state AI legislation, President Trump signed an Executive Order in December 2025, titled “Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence,” which, in part, sets out the Trump administration’s plan to target state AI laws which are deemed to “embed ideological bias within models.” While it remains unclear which state AI laws may run afoul of the executive order, and how the federal government’s enforcement efforts will take shape, manufacturers should stay up to date on applicable state and federal AI laws when using AI. Expansion of State Anti-Discrimination Protections In recent years, state anti-discrimination laws have expanded to incorporate more protected classes, including hairstyle or hair texture, immigration status, and status as a victim of family violence or sex trafficking, among others. These expansions are likely to continue at state and local levels, especially as the federal government turns its enforcement focus to unlawful diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, among others.  Expansion of State Family and Medical Leave Programs State family and medical leave laws and income-replacement programs continue to expand to cover more employees and provide greater benefits for a wider array of qualifying reasons. In recent years, qualifying reasons for the use of state family and medical leave programs have grown, with some providing job-protected leave in connection with prenatal care and certain pregnancy-related complications. Manufacturers should also be vigilant for changes in state income-replacement programs, including whether employees may use their accrued paid time off to supplement state paid leave benefits, and increases to the amount of benefits available and contribution amounts. Heightened Scrutiny of Non-Compete Agreements at State Level One of the Trump administration’s top priorities in 2025 was to roll back the Federal Trade Commission’s Biden-era “Final Rule” which would have banned nearly all non-compete agreements in employment. In executing that plan, the federal government withdrew its appeals pending before the Fifth and Eleventh Circuit Courts of Appeal, after District Courts in Texas and Florida struck down the Final Rule on the grounds that the FTC did not have authority to issue it. While the federal government abandoned the non-compete ban, in the months that followed, non-compete legislation continued to percolate at the state level, and more regulation is likely to follow in 2026. A number of state non-compete statutes limit the circumstances under which non-competes can be used by employers such as limitations based on salary thresholds, non-exempt status, job duties and industry type, and geographic and temporal scope, in addition to other criteria. As these restrictions continue to expand at the state level, manufacturers should review their non-compete agreements and avoid using broad restrictions, instead developing and implementing narrowly tailored provisions that protect a specific, articulable business interest and are compliant with applicable state law. Changes at the National Labor Relations Board The National Labor Relations Board spent much of 2025 without a quorum until the Senate appointed President Trump’s nominees in December, restoring the Board’s quorum and allowing it to roll out its enforcement and rulemaking agendas in 2026. The Board is expected to swiftly begin reversing or narrowing many of the Biden-era labor protections and issuing its own binding decisions. In addition, the Board will also likely begin to process a substantial backlog of unfair labor practices charges and appeals that were left pending when the Board did not have a quorum. Manufacturers should revisit any pending matters with the NLRB and be prepared for the NLRB to renew its enforcement activities, albeit within a new landscape and focus.

Visit Blog