Please be advised that contacting Ruder Ware by e-mail does not create an attorney-client relationship. If you contact the firm by e-mail with respect to a matter where the firm does not already represent you, any information which you disclose to us may not be regarded as privileged or confidential.


Accept   Cancel

Please be advised that contacting Ruder Ware by e-mail does not create an attorney-client relationship. If you contact the firm by e-mail with respect to a matter where the firm does not already represent you, any information which you disclose to us may not be regarded as privileged or confidential.


Accept   Cancel

PAL Login

linkedin.jpgyoutube.jpgvimeo.jpgtwitter_off.png View Ruder Ware

Search Results


Warning: substr_count(): Empty substring in /home/ruderw5/public_html/blocks/search/controller.php on line 263

Warning: substr_count(): Empty substring in /home/ruderw5/public_html/blocks/search/controller.php on line 263

Warning: substr_count(): Empty substring in /home/ruderw5/public_html/blocks/search/controller.php on line 263

Warning: substr_count(): Empty substring in /home/ruderw5/public_html/blocks/search/controller.php on line 263

Warning: substr_count(): Empty substring in /home/ruderw5/public_html/blocks/search/controller.php on line 263

Warning: substr_count(): Empty substring in /home/ruderw5/public_html/blocks/search/controller.php on line 263

Searching for Articles published in September 2015.
Found 6 Results.

Electronic Signatures Expedite Union Election Petition

Posted on September 9, 2015, Authored by Dean R. Dietrich, Filed under Employment

A recent pronouncement by General Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board has indicated that electronic signatures will be accepted on a union election petition filed with the NLRB.  This clarification allows the union election process to be expedited to be even quicker than originally thought under the new “quickie election” rules promulgated by the National Labor Relations Board.  Under those rules, an election petition is to be processed within a very short time frame and any legal challenge to who is eligible to be included in a vote for union representation will ultimately be litigated after the election vote has been taken.  The quickie election process eliminates much of the opportunity for an employer to express its opinion about the wisdom of having a union at the company facilities. Under this new clarification, a union can file an election petition with documentation showing that various signatures on the petition have been approved or authenticated by electronic means.  The primary focus here is for an employee to send an e-mail to the union organizer indicating various information about the individual and indicating the signature validity on an election petition filed by the union.  Employees will not be required to actually sign an election petition but rather may respond to an e-mail from the union organizer indicating agreement to sign the petition. This initiative by the NLRB to accept electronic signatures is another step toward expediting a union election proceeding for the benefit of the union organizers.  Employers must recognize their limited opportunity to question a union election petition or to advocate against union representation at their facility.  Employers must do everything to be prepared to respond quickly to the union organizing effort at their company. 

Protect Your Assets: Medical Care & Long-Term Planning - Fall 2015 - Wausau, WI

Posted on September 29, 2015, Authored by ,

Medical Assistance & Long-Term Care Planning The Need for Planning Who Is Eligible for Medical Assistance Planning? Protection of the House and Vacation Home Permitted Transfers of Assets Using Trusts to Protect Your Assets This seminar is offered at no charge. It is offered at both 10:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. Please specify a time when registering. Location: Holiday Inn & Suites, 1000 Imperial Ave, Rothschild, WI 54474 Holiday Inn & Suites, 1000 Imperial Ave, Rothschild, WI  54474 To register, contact Shannon Jacobson: sjacobson@ruderware.com 715.845.4336 Please specify whether you will be attending the 10:30 a.m. or 5:30 p.m. session.

Protect Your Assets: Medical Care & Long-Term Planning - Fall 2015 - Eau Claire, WI

Posted on September 29, 2015, Authored by ,

Medical Assistance & Long-Term Care Planning The Need for Planning Who Is Eligible for Medical Assistance Planning? Protection of the House and Vacation Home Permitted Transfers of Assets Using Trusts to Protect Your Assets This seminar is offered at no charge. It is offered at both 10:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. Please specify a time when registering. Holiday Inn South, 4751 Owen Ayres Court Eau Claire, WI

Annual Employment, Benefits & Labor Relations Law Conference - Fall 2015

Posted on September 14, 2015, Authored by ,

Registration: 7:30 a.m. Welcome and Introductions: 8:00 a.m. 8:05 a.m. - 9:20 a.m. Never a Dull Moment in the Employee Benefits World! Attorney Mary Ellen Schill Update on ACA, impact of Supreme Court same sex marriage decision on benefit plans, and whatever else is keeping us up at night. Break: 9:20 a.m. - 9:30 a.m. 9:30 a.m. - 10:40 a.m. One Rightsize Fits All:  What You Need to Know About Game-Changing Rule Changes to Overtime, Independent-Contractor Relationships, and Contingent Workforce Relationships In this session, we will walk attendees through the Department of Labor’s long-anticipated, proposed rule changes governing overtime and the so-called “white collar” exemptions [including proposed changes to the salary level test, possible changes to the “duties” tests, current “white collar” exemptions, and Wisconsin-specific wrinkles], the Department of Labor’s increased agency scrutiny of independent-contractor relationships and employee misclassification, and the National Labor Relations Board’s controversial “joint employment” standard and how this standard impacts the franchise model and the contingent workforce. Break: 10:40 a.m. - 10:50 a.m. Morning Workshops (Choose One) 10:50 a.m. - Noon Walking the Pre-Hire Tightrope:  Tips and Traps! Attorneys Sara Ackermann and Kevin Terry Employment laws and regulations are constantly changing. Mistakes made during the hiring process can cause big legal trouble for unwary employers. Medical inquiries, criminal background checks, arrest and conviction records, social media snooping, drug testing, and noncompete agreements are all areas where human resources professionals must proceed with caution. Sara’s presentation will give you the “balance” you need so YOU can avoid the “fall” into the courtroom. "Banging on the Drum All Day":  Dealing With Leaves of Absence and Unavailability for Work Attorney Dean Dietrich Companies have experienced a growing portion of their workforce asking for time off or claiming the need for time off in order to address illness or family matters. Employers struggle with the requirement to comply with the Federal and State Family Medical Leave Act as well as the accommodation requirements under the Americans With Disabilities Act and Wisconsin Fair Employment Act. This program will address employer obligations under these various laws and identify strategies to be used to prevent employees from taking advantage of extra time off. Remember the song, “I Don’t Want to Work – I Want to Bang on the Drum All Day”? Lunch and Networking Noon - 1:00 p.m. During lunch, our panel of attorneys will invite you to ask questions. Feel free to bring your "hypothetical" questions and try to stump the experts! See our brochure for more details.  HRCI credit - 3 hours HR (General). Westwood Conference Center 1800 Westwood Center Blvd Wausau, WI  54401 Please contact: Shannon Jacobson at sjacobson@ruderware.com (715) 845.4336

WOTUS Legal Challenges Update

Posted on September 9, 2015, Authored by Russell W. Wilson,

There are numerous pending lawsuits challenging the EPA and Corps of Engineers’ “Waters of the United States” (WOTUS) Rule.  The Rule took effect in thirty-seven states on August 28, 2015, after proceedings in three of these lawsuits. The explanation lies in procedural intricacy.  Under the Clean Water Act (“CWA”), original jurisdiction to challenge a rule may lie either in a federal district court or the Circuit Court of Appeals depending upon whether the challenged rule has the precise effect of any action to “issue or deny a permit”¹ or whether it constitutes an “other limitation.”² Three federal district courts issued decisions on motions to preliminarily enjoin enforcement of the new WOTUS Rule.  In two of the cases³, the federal district courts, interpreting the procedural language broadly, determined that original jurisdiction lies in the Circuit Court of Appeals.  Accordingly, on August 26 and 27, the district courts in the Northern District of West Virginia and the Southern District of Georgia, respectively, dismissed the lawsuits, which rendered the motions for preliminary injunctions moot. The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation randomly selected the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals to hear the WOTUS challenges.  It remains to be seen whether the decisions by the Southern District of Georgia and the Northern District of West Virginia will be appealed.  The Sixth Circuit will eventually hear the Georgia and West Virginia cases either under its original jurisdiction or as appeals from the district courts. On August 27, 2015, the district court for the District of North Dakota, in contrast, interpreted the procedural provisions of the CWA narrowly and determined that original jurisdiction lies in the district court rather than in the court of appeals.  Further, the North Dakota district court granted the challengers’ preliminary injunction based upon the record before the court. The North Dakota decision predicts that the categorical inclusion of tributaries under WOTUS is likely to fail Justice Kennedy’s “significant nexus” test because minor tributaries may have an insufficient nexus to traditional navigable waters.  The North Dakota decision identifies the lack of a rational basis between remote and intermittent waters and any nexus to traditional navigable waters.  The decision also notes the lack of a scientific basis for the 4,000-foot rule applied in case-specific determination under Section (a)(8).4 Finally, the North Dakota decision holds that the definition of “neighboring” is so expansive that it is not a “logical outgrowth” of the rule as it was initially proposed, which makes that definition procedurally deficient.  There is an important caveat, however, to the North Dakota decision: While the court would prefer an opportunity to review the entire administrative record, rather than rely on a handful of documents and deliberative memoranda, it is impossible to obtain the record prior to the effective date of the Rule.  Under these unique circumstances, including a review of the Army Corps of Engineers’ memoranda, consideration of the documents in the record is “the only way there can be effective judicial review.”  (citation omitted) It remains to be seen whether the North Dakota decision will be appealed.  For the time being the preliminary injunction against enforcement for the WOTUS rule is in place in North Dakota, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Idaho, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, South Dakota, Wyoming, and New Mexico, i.e. the states that filed suit in the North Dakota litigation.  WOTUS is presently in effect in the remaining thirty-seven states, which includes Wisconsin. For an excellent, incisive overview of WOTUS, I recommend reading “Waters of the United States”: A Mean-Spirited Guide” by Christopher D. Thomas, Esq. published in the ABA Section of Environment, Energy, and Resources Volume 30, Number 1, Summer 2015, pg. 32-35. [1] 33 U.S.C. § 1369(b)(1)(F) [2] 33 U.S.C. § 1369(b)(1)(E) [3] Those pending in the Southern District of Georgia-Brunswick Division (State of Georgia, et al. v. Gina A. McCarthey, et al. cv 215-79) and the Northern District of West Virginia (Murray Energy Corporation v. United States Environmental Protection Agency (Civil Action No.1:15CV110) [4] 33 C.F.R. § 328.3(a)(8)

Accounting Manager

Posted on September 23, 2015, Authored by ,

  Current Openings Ruder Ware, a leading business law firm in Wisconsin, seeks a full-time Accounting Manager.  This position reports to the Chief Operating Officer and is a member of the firm’s administrative team.  The successful candidate will be a self-starter that possesses excellent communication skills and the ability to manage and develop the accounting staff.  This position plays an essential role within the firm, producing information and reports for the firm’s board of directors that help set the direction and pace for the firm.  The position entails oversight of the time and billing system, the billing process, accounts receivable, accounts payable, and budget development.  We are seeking candidates who are able to identify and execute strategies at a high level. A bachelor’s degree in accounting or commensurate work experience is required.  Experience with the Microsoft Office product suite is a must, especially thorough knowledge of Microsoft Excel. Ruder Ware offers a competitive compensation package along with a rich benefit package.  Interested candidates are asked to send a resume and cover letter to: Jamie Schaefer, Chief Operating Officer Ruder Ware, L.L.S.C. P.O. Box 8050 Wausau, WI  54402-8050 jschaefer@ruderware.com