The Rocky Mountain Employer

“On October 21, 2025, the Supreme Court of Colorado heard oral arguments on a single question from the United States District Court for the District of Colorado (the “District Court”) in Moreno v. Circle K Stores, Inc.: Does Colorado law recognize a public policy exception to the at-will employment doctrine that allows an employee to bring a wrongful termination claim in the event the employee is terminated for actions taken in self-defense?  If the Supreme Court answers, “yes,” Colorado employers will need to consider an employee’s right to self-defense when violence arises in the workplace when drafting its workplace policies.”

“The Colorado Department of Labor & Employment Division of Labor Standards & Statistics (the “DLSS”) announced a public hearing of proposed rulemaking will occur on November 4, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. (attendance by remote means only) (the “Hearing”) to make rules for new employment laws, including the law allowing liability for wage claims for an individual who owns 25% or more of a company.  If you are interested in participating in or testifying at the hearing use this form.”

On Monday October 6, 2025, the Supreme Court declined to review a Third Circuit ruling on whether home health aides’ (“HHA”) travel time between patient visits during one continuous workday must be compensated under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (“FLSA”).  The Supreme Court’s decision to decline review effectively allows the circuit courts to follow the Third Circuit’s reasoning for determining whether travel time is integral and indispensable to the employee’s principal working activity.

“On September 19, 2025, the federal government reshaped the H-1B program on two fronts. Employers now face dramatically higher fees just to enter the H-1B lottery, while the Department of Labor’s (“DOL”) new “Project Firewall” initiative promises more aggressive enforcement on the back end. For businesses that rely on foreign talent, the risks—and the costs—have never been higher.”

“On September 15, 2025, the Supreme Court of Colorado issued a significant decision en banc in By the Rockies LLC v. Perez, holding that the statute of limitations under the Colorado Wage Claims Act (“CWCA”) applies to claims brought under the Colorado Minimum Wage Act (“CMWA”). The Court’s ruling resolves a split at the state’s appellate level and brings consistency between Colorado and federal law, which follows a similar statute of limitations period.“

On September 9, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals considered a transgender woman’s lawsuit against her employer, the Sheriff’s Office of Houston County, Georgia (the “County”).  The lawsuit alleged that the County’s healthcare plan (the “Plan”) discriminated based on sex due to it excluding gender-affirming surgery from coverage. The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that the Plan did not violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”) on its face, giving employers in Colorado an insight as to what the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals could decide in similar cases that their transgender employees may bring against them.

“On April 23, 2024, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) under President Biden’s administration issued a rule banning noncompete agreements nationwide (“Rule”), which was immediately challenged in court and eventually enjoined from taking effect.  Recently, under the Trump administration the FTC moved to dismiss two appeals of the injunction pending in the Fifth and Eleventh Circuit Courts of Appeals, citing the change in administration as well as public comments made by FTC Chair Andrew Ferguson as grounds for an initial stay of the case.  Now, the agency has officially walked back its support of the Rule.”

“Colorado ballot Initiative 119 ( “Initiative 119”) would repeal a recent Colorado law, House Bill 25-1296 (“HB25-1296”), which separated Colorado’s overtime tax policy from federal overtime tax policy and requires Coloradans to add the amount of overtime pay excluded from their federal income tax revenue, via the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (“OBBA”), to their Colorado taxable income. However, this tax structure could all change if the proponents of Initiative 119 proponents obtain sufficient signatures to put Initiative 119 on the Colorado ballot in the November 3, 2026, general election and Colorado voters pass Initiative 119.”

“Colorado’s efforts to regulate artificial intelligence (“AI”) in employment decisions have reached a critical turning point. The most recent reform proposals under Senate Bill 25B-004 (“SB-004”) include liability provisions that would significantly expand  exposure to AI developers under both the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act (“CADA”), Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-34-401 et seq., and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. (“Title VII”), despite the AI developer not being an employer. “ 

“On August 19, 2025, a jury returned a verdict awarding Donquenick Joppy (“Joppy”) $20,000,000.00 against HCA-Healthone LLC d/b/a the Medical Center of Aurora (“TMCA”) when the jury found TMCA liable for racial discrimination and retaliation in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (“Section 1981”), making it one of the largest awards in a racial discrimination case in recent years.”

“On July 29, 2025, the Attorney General of the United States (“Attorney General”) issued a memorandum titled “Guidance for Recipients of Federal Funding Regarding Unlawful Discrimination (the “Memo”).” The Memo is intended to clarify the application of federal anti-discrimination laws to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (“DEI”) programs or initiatives that may involve discriminatory practices. The Memo highlights DEI efforts that could trigger legal scrutiny, even for private entities not directly benefitting from federal funds.”

“On July 29, 2025, the Colorado Attorney General, Philip Weiser (“Attorney General”), filed a Complaint against PetSmart, alleging that PetSmart violated the Colorado Consumer Protection Act (“CCPA”) and the Colorado Restrictive Employment Agreements Act (“CREAA”) by misrepresenting to its employees that its dog grooming training program was free.  The Attorney General alleges that PetSmart’s training program was actually not free because PetSmart required its employees in the program to pay back the value of the program if they were terminated or quit prior to the two-year anniversary of their beginning the program, which resulted in an illegal restriction on their employment.  The Attorney General, via the lawsuit, seeks injunctive relief, civil penalties ranging from $20,000.00 - $50,000.00 per violation of the CCPA and $5,000.00 per worker per violation of the CREAA, attorneys’ fees, and costs against PetSmart as a result of its alleged wrongdoing.”

“On July 24, 2025, The Department of Labor’s (“DOL”) Wage and Hour Division (“WHD”) reinstated the Payroll Audit Independent Determination Program (“PAID” or the “Program”). PAID is designed to help the employers using it to resolve potential minimum wage and overtime violations under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) and violations under the Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”) before any lawsuits based on said violations are instituted. PAID gives employers the ability to conduct self-audits of their pay practices and work with the DOL’s WHD to cure any wage-related pay mistakes or omissions and ensure that employees receive their back wages, or other remedies, prior to litigation ensuing.  If an employer wishes to dispute the alleged wages owed to an employee, it cannot utilize the PAID Program.”

“The Rocky Mountain Employer has tracked Senate Bill 25-083 (“SB25-083”) since the Colorado Senate introduced it during the Colorado General Assembly’s 2025 Regular Session.  As discussed in the Rocky Mountain Employer’s April 24, 2025, post, SB25-083 effectively bans nearly all non-compete agreements for medical professionals. SB25-083 was passed by the full General Assembly as of April 21, 2025, and on June 3, 2025, Governor Polis signed the bill into law. Consequently, the use of most restrictive covenants in employment agreements with physicians, physician assistants, certified midwives, dentists, and advanced practice registered nurses entered into after August 6, 2025, will be prohibited.”

“Workplace sexual harassment and abuse are not uncommon phenomena, but the United States Congress and President Trump recently passed a bill called the “Take it Down Act” which criminalizes, on a federal level, the nonconsensual publication of intimate or sexually graphic images of another person—whether legitimate or artificially generated (i.e. via artificial intelligence)—and creates avenues of redress for those persons affected by such conduct.  It also sets forth compliance requirements for any web-based platform to address complaints of AI-generated “deepfakes,” and declares a platform’s failure to comply to be an unfair or deceptive trade practice.“

“On July 7, 2025, the Wage and Hour Division of the Department of Labor (DOL) announced its withdrawal of its proposed rule published on December 4, 2024, which purposed to phase out the issuance of subminimum wage certificates to workers with disabilities under section 14(c) of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). With this withdrawal, the DOL formally discontinues the proposed rule and removes it from further consideration.”

“On June 27, 2025, the Department of Labor (“DOL”) issued Field Assistance Bulletin 2025-3 (“FAB 2025-3”) effectively rescinding the DOL’s prior practice of assessing (or threatening to assess) liquidated damages at the administrative investigation phase of wage and hour complaints under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”).   In other words, per FAB 2025-3, the DOL will only seek awards of liquidated damages for wage and hour violations once they are actually litigated, and either an award or a settlement is reached.”

“On June 20, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States (the “Court”) decided Stanley v. City of Sanford, affirming the dismissal of a complaint alleging a retiree’s claim of disparate treatment on the basis of her disability in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”). The Court held that the retiree’s claim must be dismissed because she was not a “qualified individual” under Title I of the ADA (“Title I”), as she did not plead that she could perform the essential functions of the employment position that she held or desired. In so doing, the Court substantially limited retirees’ ability to enforce the protections articulated in Title I.”

“Campbell Litigation - Best wishes on this Juneteenth holiday”

“On June 5, 2025, the United States Supreme Court (the “Court”) vacated and remanded the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit’s (the “Court of Appeals”) decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services (“Ames”), in which the Court of Appeals applied the heightened “background circumstances test” for reverse discrimination claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”) to grant summary judgment in favor of the employer.  In so doing, the Court effectively abolished a significant evidentiary roadblock faced by members of “majority” groups who claim discrimination based on their protected class(es), which will dramatically affect discrimination jurisprudence in multiple federal circuits—including the Tenth Circuit.”