Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Photo of Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Howard is an associate in the Labor and Employment group in Seyfarth Shaw’s New York office. His practice includes the representation of management in employment litigation matters before state and federal courts, at trial and appellate levels, as well as federal and state agencies, including the National Labor Relations Board, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Department of Labor, New York State Division of Human Rights, New Jersey Division on Civil Rights and the New York State Public Employment Relations Board.  In this role, Mr. Wexler has extensive experience defending both single and multi-plaintiff discrimination/harassment cases, class and/or collective actions, as well as lawsuits initiated by the EEOC.  He has represented employers in class and collective actions and multi-plaintiff claims involving discrimination/harassment on the basis of age, race, gender, national origin, and other protected classifications. His wage-and-hour experience includes the defense of major class action claims involving meal breaks, rest breaks, misclassification, and work-off-the-clock allegations.

Latest Articles

By: Christopher W. Kelleher and John T. Ayers-Mann Seyfarth Synopsis: Though the NLRA provides robust protections for striking employees, the Board’s decision in Consolidated Communications demonstrates some of the limits of those protections. On October 2, 2018, the NLRB held that inherently dangerous acts calculated to intimidate do not fall within the broad scope of the NLRA’s protections. The National Labor Relations Board, in a recent decision, has provided further guidance on the limits of…
By: Samuel Sverdlov and Howard Wexler Seyfarth Synopsis: The E-Verify program has become a controversial topic in the political arena and throughout workplaces nationwide.  Last month, the NLRB held, amongst other things, that an employer violated the NLRA by unilaterally enrolling in the E-Verify program without first bargaining with the union. Immigration law has long been at the forefront of political discourse in the United States.  One question that employers continue to grapple with is…
By Monica Rodriguez and Jeffrey A. Berman Seyfarth Synopsis: The National Labor Relations Board recently commenced an examination of the continued validity of a number of Obama Board actions. These include joint employer status, employee use of company email systems, and the “quickie election rules.” This blog provides an overview of the Board’s recent activities. Just like Vladimir  and Estragon in Waiting for Godot, employers, unions, and employees are waiting for the National Labor Relations…
BY:  Joshua L. Ditelberg and Stuart Newman Seyfarth Synopsis: The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or Board) announced that it will publish a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on September 14, 2018 in the Federal Register regarding its standard for assessing whether a joint-employer relationship exists. Under the NLRB’s joint-employer doctrine, the Board analyzes whether two separate business entities (e.g., service provider and client, franchisor and franchisee) share sufficient control over key employment terms such that…
By Ashley Laken Seyfarth Synopsis: U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit rules that the NLRB properly found that a hospital violated the NLRA by threatening employees with discipline and arrest for peacefully picketing on hospital property. On August 10, 2018, in Capital Medical Center v. NLRB, No. 16-1369, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit agreed with the NLRB that off-duty employees at a hospital had the right under Section 7…
By:  Jason Silver Seyfarth Synopsis: A mere six weeks after the Supreme Court held that fair share or agency fees for public-sector unions are unconstitutional in Janus v. AFSCME, Pennsylvania introduces a bill that would require public-sector unions to obtain a majority vote of all employees, including non-union employees, to authorize a strike. On August 7, 2018 republican representatives in Pennsylvania introduced and referred to the committee on labor and industry House Bill No. 2586,…
By: Timothy Hoppe Seyfarth Synopsis: Labor friendly states will likely be looking for opportunities to lessen the financial blow of the Supreme Court’s decision in Janus v. AFSCME. The Ninth Circuit’s recent decision in Interpipe Contracting v. Becerra just helped give California a head start (although perhaps only a small one).  For many years, California employers subject to the state’s prevailing wage law (employers working on public works projects) could take a credit towards…
  By: Joshua M. Henderson Seyfarth Synopsis:  Just when employers thought they were safe to restrict offensive speech and restore decorum in the workplace, a recent decision by the Board serves as a stark reminder that offensive workplace speech may still find protection under the National Labor Relations Act. In Constellium Rolled Products Ravenswood, LLC, the Board decided that an employee who wrote the words “whore board” on an overtime sign-in sheet was engaged…
By:  Bradford L. Livingston On July 17, 2018, the DOL rescinded its 2016 “persuader rule” — a controversial reinterpretation of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 (LMRDA) that would have required employers and their consultants (including lawyers) to report their relationships and the fees paid related to persuading employees “to exercise or not to exercise… the right to organize and bargain collectively… .” The 2016 rule effectively eviscerated the LMRDA’s exemption for reporting advice,…
By: Glenn J. Smith and Jason J. Silver Seyfarth Synopsis: Public-sector labor unions were dealt a heavy, but not unexpected, blow as the Supreme Court of the United States issued a landmark decision in Janus v. AFSCME. By a vote of 5 to 4, the Court held that fair share fees for public-sector unions are unconstitutional.   Whether the actual fallout from the decision will match the level of the pre-decision rhetoric remains to be…