Under the tripartite leadership of Pritzker, Madigan and Cullerton, Illinois is quickly attempting to "catch up" to California as a very pro-employee State.
On May 31, 2019, the State of Illinois approved House Bill 1438 which created the "Cannabis Regulation and Tax Act". This Bill was signed, with a lot of "fanfare and publicity," by Governor Pritzker on June 24, 2019. The Act provides that, effective January 1, 2020, Illinois Residents who are 21 years of age or older may legally possess up to thirty (30) grams of cannabis flower; no more than 500 milligrams of THC contained in cannabis infused products and five (5) grams of cannabis concentrate. Non-Illinois residents will be able to legally possess fifteen (15) grams of cannabis flower; no more than 250 milligrams of THC and cannabis-infused products and 2.5 grams of cannabis concentrate (i.e., one-half of that Illinois available residents). Any and all permitted cannabis purchases must be made from licensed cannabis dispensaries. Obviously, the House Bill also provided substantial tax incentives to be taken on the above purchases and, in the opinion of the author, that is the major or principal reason that this legislation has been passed.
Over the many years in which I have represented Illinois companies before the Illinois Department of Employment Security (IDES), I have seen the activity level of the IDES ebb and flow.
In this ever-litigious society of ours, it is comforting to see reason prevail on occasion, and the court's recent decision in Summers v. Target Corporation, Case No. 18-C-32 (E.D. Wis. 2019) is a good example. In Summers, an employee contended that his supervisor caused him anxiety, stress, palpitations and panic disorders, for which he was prescribed anti-depressants and anti-anxiety medication. He took a medical leave and his therapist recommended that he be transferred to another location (and hence, a new supervisor) as an accommodation of his condition. When Target refused, he resigned and sued for failure to accommodate under the ADA.
The IRS uses a Questionnaire called the IRS Form SS-8 (Determination of Worker Status for Purposes of Federal Employment Taxes and Income Tax Withholding) to determine when a particular "worker" is an independent contractor and when the "worker" is an employee.
While the statement "he who hesitates may be lost" has been around for decades, it may be the underpinning of a very recent Supreme Court decision. In a unanimous decision issued by the United States Supreme Court on June 3, 2019 (Fort Bend County vs. Davis, No. 18-525, Argued 4/22/19; Decided 6/3/19) the Supreme Court of the United States held that an employment discrimination plaintiff's failure to exhaust administrative remedies is not a jurisdictional prerequisite to filing litigation and, therefore, Federal courts may be able to hear discrimination claims under Title VII even if workers fail to raise those claims with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") or a state workplace bias watchdog group.