NELA

Empowering Workers' Rights Attorneys

Pedro Valverde

NELA Files Comment on Rescission of Subregulatory FLSA Guidance from the CFR

On July 2, the Department of Labor (DOL) issued a notice of proposed rulemaking in which it proposed to remove from the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) all the interpretive rules and policy statements contained in Title 29, Chapter V, Subchapter B of the CFR. These portions of the CFR deal with the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and include a wealth of information that is useful to judges and plaintiffs’ lawyers in interpreting the FLSA, as well as to regulated entities in promoting effective legal compliance. This proposed change would remove approximately 485 separate regulations from the CFR on an incredibly wide range of FLSA-related topics.

On August 1, NELA filed comment on the proposed rule, calling on the DOL to take a less arbitrary approach to its interpretive regulations and emphasizing the decades-long reliance of judges, attorneys, and regulated entities on the substantial body of accumulated departmental expertise contained in these portions of the CFR. The CFR provisions at issue have been referenced by judges in over 1,000 FLSA opinions. NELA also pointed out that these interpretive rules have stood the test of time, such that they have demonstrated their “power to persuade” by virtue of the “experience … Read More

Executive Director

The National Employment Lawyers Association (NELA) and National Institute for Workers’ Rights (NIWR) seek a creative, self-aware, and empathetic leader to guide the organizations in building on our strategic plan and goals, expanding our resources and membership, and championing a culture of equity, inclusion, and cultural and racial literacy.

Who We Are

The National Employment Lawyers Association (NELA), a 501(c)(6) organization, is the largest professional organization in the United States whose members are lawyers who either exclusively or primarily represent workers in cases involving employment and traditional civil rights issues, race discrimination, sexual harassment, wage theft, employee benefits, and other employment-related matters. Founded in 1985, NELA and its circuit, state, and local Affiliates have more than 3,000 members nationwide. In carrying out our mission to empower workers’ rights attorneys, NELA provides exceptional opportunities for professional development through continuing legal education programs, networking, publications, and technical support. NELA advocates for workers’ rights through partnerships with our Affiliates and coalition partners, and by participating as amicus curiae in briefs to voice the interests and perspectives of workers in significant employment cases filed in the U.S. Supreme Court, U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals, U.S. District Courts, and before government agencies. NELA advocates before … Read More

NELA Statement on Worksite Raids by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement

ICE Worksite Raids Target Vulnerable Workers and Undermine Labor Protections

The National Employment Lawyers Association (NELA) condemns the raids conducted by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and its law enforcement collaborators, which target vulnerable workers, suppress their voices, and deny access to the legal systems in place to protect them. These raids are a direct assault on fundamental human rights and do nothing to address the root causes of labor exploitation, silencing individuals who might otherwise report wage theft, discrimination, hazardous conditions, and even human trafficking.

By perpetuating a climate of intimidation, ICE’s actions enable abuse, erode access to labor and employment protections, and undermine due process. No worker—regardless of immigration status—should fear retaliation for demanding fair wages and safe working conditions. These raids harm not only the individuals they target but also the integrity of our labor system, creating an environment where abusive workplace conduct thrives unchecked and workers and their advocates are in danger of arrest, deportation, or other harms.

NELA calls for an end to these raids and urges enforcement efforts to focus on holding employers accountable for labor and employment law violations, rather than punishing the workers subjected to their employers’ greed. We stand resolute … Read More

National Employment Lawyers Association Statement on the Supreme Court’s Unanimous Decision in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services

Yesterday the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 9-0 in favor of the worker in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, holding that the “Sixth Circuit’s ‘background circumstances’ rule—which requires members of a majority group to satisfy a heightened evidentiary standard to prevail on a Title VII claim—cannot be squared with the text of Title VII or the Court’s precedents.” Along with the Biden Administration, NELA filed an amicus brief on behalf of the worker in Ames, authored by renowned Supreme Court practitioner Professor Eric Schnapper. In light of the expected unanimous result in favor of Ames and against the “background circumstances” test, NELA focused its brief on asking the Court to clarify that no workers should be subject to an overly rigid application of McDonnell Douglas at the summary judgment stage, a call that was endorsed by other civil rights organizations.

The Court spoke to the issue. While the holding was narrowly focused on the “background circumstances” test, both the majority and concurring opinions emphasized the importance of flexibility when courts apply McDonnell Douglas. Justice Jackson’s opinion for the majority noted: “The ‘background circumstances’ rule also ignores our instruction to avoid inflexible applications of McDonnell Douglas’s first prong. … Read More

Joseph W. Gibson

Employment Law Center of Maryland
Fredrick, MD
Member Since 2020
Law School: American University Washington College of Law

What inspired you to practice plaintiffs’ employment law?

I was inspired to practice plaintiffs’ employment law because it provides a tangible way to defend civil rights in the workplace—a space that impacts nearly everyone, given the fundamental role work plays in people’s lives.

Career-wise, what accomplishment are you most proud of?

The career accomplishment I am most proud of is founding the Employment Law Center of Maryland and transforming it into a fully-fledged employment law firm.

What advice do you have for law students or new lawyers interested in this area of law?

My advice to new lawyers or law students interested in plaintiffs’ employment law is to demand the same fair treatment in your own workplace that you fight for on behalf of your clients and never hesitate to advocate for yourself.

What does NELA membership mean to you? How has it impacted your career?

My NELA membership has provided me with a true community of colleagues whose wisdom and support are indispensable, offering a reliable network I can count on for guidance and shared expertise.

What’s your favorite way to … Read More

Heather M. Burns

Upton & Hatfield, LLP
Concord, NH
Member Since 1993
Law School: University of New Hampshire Franklin Pierce School of Law

What inspired you to practice plaintiffs’ employment law?

When I first graduated from law school, I worked for a firm in Manchester, NH. The firm was hired to represent an employee in an age discrimination case, but they didn’t handle employment cases. They asked me to take it and run with it, and I did, leading to my first plaintiff’s verdict in a case in the federal district court of New Hampshire. I was struck, and began to jump in with both feet, learning to handle all manner of workers’ rights cases at the firm.

Career-wise, what accomplishment are you most proud of?

I have been representing plaintiffs for 33 years in employment discrimination cases. I am most proud of my representation of women who have been subjected to gender discrimination. It is an issue so close to my own heart. My first verdict representing a woman was Jeanne Boisvert v. Sears Roebuck & Co., when I was seven years out of law school. I won a $1M verdict in the gender discrimination/retaliation case before Judge Stephen McAuliffe in the … Read More

Statement From The National Employment Lawyers Association And National Institute For Workers’ Rights On EEOC Acting Chair Lucas’ Letters To Law Firms

The National Employment Lawyers Association and the National Institute for Workers’ Rights are deeply troubled by Acting Chair Andrea Lucas’ recent letters to twenty law firms aimed at scrutinizing or undermining their attempts to prevent discrimination and promote opportunity. Acting Chair Lucas has no authority to send these letters and demand this information, as explained in the March 18 letter from former EEOC officials. The letters represent an alarming betrayal of the agency’s fundamental mission of eradicating workplace discrimination and promoting equitable employment practices.

Though NELA members are often on the other side of these law firms in cases, we stand by their side in defending their right—indeed, obligation—to ensure their workplaces are fair and free of bias. The legal profession has traditionally not been hospitable to women, people of color, and others who are underrepresented in occupations like law. Firms that are trying to change that should be lauded, not criticized.

Law firms play a pivotal role in shaping employment policies and guiding corporate America’s understanding and implementation of civil rights law. If the legal profession is dissuaded from trying to make their hiring and promotion practices fair and prevent discrimination, the downstream effect on countless organizations and industries … Read More

NELA President’s Reflections on Black History Month

As we come to the close of Black History Month, it is important to reflect upon and recognize both the singular achievements of, and the unique and central role played by Black people in our nation’s cultural, intellectual, political, and legal history. At NELA, we should take this opportunity to do the same for our incredible colleagues. Today, I honor one such colleague very close to my own heart—Carla Brown, NELA’s first Black woman president. Carla is a force, a fearless leader, and seriously fun. There are few people I have ever met who are as thoughtful as Carla. I often say, that while many of us find ourselves playing checkers, Carla is always playing chess. I have been so honored to serve on the NELA Executive Board with her and to count her not only as a trusted colleague but, most importantly, as a valued friend.

Carla’s professional achievements speak for themselves. She is a partner at Charlson Bredehoft Cohen Brown & Nadelhaft, P.C. in Reston, Virgina. She regularly and successfully tries cases in Virgina, Washington D.C., and Maryland with outstanding results, for which she has been widely recognized. She has been featured as one of Virginia’s Go To … Read More

Verónica González

Veronica GonzalezLowrey Parady Lebsack, LLC
Denver, CO
Member Since 2024
Law School: University of Colorado

What inspired you to practice plaintiffs’ employment law?

My parents immigrated to the U.S. from Ecuador, and when I was child, my mother told me stories of experiencing discrimination in the workplace. These stories of hardship stuck in my memory and shaped my beliefs, which later fueled my passion when I read cases for my Employment Law, Discrimination, and Disability Rights courses in law school. The stories of employees resonated with me, and I realized that I wanted to represent them in my career.

Career-wise, what accomplishment are you most proud of?

I am most proud of participating in NELA’s effort to eliminate the Section 1981a compensatory damages caps in employment discrimination cases. My role was completing a comprehensive examination of District of Colorado cases where courts reduced jury verdicts because of the caps. This research was passed along to NELA’s lobbyist, with an end goal of being sent to Senators Hickenlooper and Bennet.

What advice do you have for law students or new lawyers interested in this area of law?

The best way to learn more about plaintiffs’ employment law is grabbing coffee or lunch … Read More

EEOC Policy Shifts Threaten Workplace Discrimination Safeguards

The National Employment Lawyers Association (NELA) is deeply concerned about recent developments that cast doubt on the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC) ability to fulfill its mission to prevent and remedy unlawful employment discrimination. Any weakening of the EEOC’s enforcement of sex discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity undermines progress made towards a just workplace rooted in the principles of diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility, and leaves one of our nation’s most vulnerable populations at even greater risk of marginalization.

The recent changes by the EEOC, which include halting the processing of claims that allege discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity, rolling back guidance on gender identity discrimination, and removing gender identity related resources, disregard the Supreme Court’s 2020 landmark decision in Bostock v. Clayton County. This ruling explicitly recognized that Title VII protections include sexual orientation and gender identity, thereby codifying workplace protections for LGBTQIA+ individuals. The EEOC under Acting Chair Andrea Lucas is contradicting its own past rulings and the law.

NELA stands in unwavering support of LGBTQIA+ workers and will continue to empower workers’ rights advocates in their fight to protect the rights of these workers, and all workers who seek justice.… Read More

Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services

On December 16, 2024, NELA filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services. The question presented is whether, to survive summary judgment, employees of so-called “majority” groups must show “background circumstances” that the employer discriminates against the majority as an additional element of their prima facie case under McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green. Under the authorship of renowned Supreme Court practitioner Eric Schnapper, NELA took the opportunity to remind the Court that all workers, and not just majority workers, can be harmed by lower courts’ overly rigid application of the McDonnell Douglas at the summary judgment stage. NELA urged the Court to hold that while McDonnell Douglas can be a useful tool in some cases and that plaintiffs have the right to proceed under that framework if they so choose, employees do not need to establish a prima facie case at all to survive summary judgment. Rather, the question at summary judgment should be, as it is in all cases, whether there is a genuine issue of material fact that could allow a reasonable jury to find in the plaintiff’s favor. In crafting this brief, NELA weighed many competing interests, … Read More