This podcast examines open enrollment challenges amidst rising costs, including how employers can communicate with their employees about health care plan changes, with Faegre Baker Daniels attorney Mike MacLean.
This podcast gives listeners a unique look inside the Supreme Court with on-the-scene coverage of Zubik v. Burwell, the latest challenge to the Affordable Care Act's (ACA's) contraceptive coverage requirement. The Court recently heard arguments in this case brought by two dozen religiously affiliated nonprofits, and we feature the key questions on the justices' minds.
The Supreme Court recently heard arguments in a case that could decide the future of the Affordable Care Act. XpertHR takes you inside the courtroom for a unique perspective on this hotly-debated issue in King v. Burwell.
What must employers know about the Affordable Care Act in 2015? This XpertHR podcast features insights from New Jersey employment attorney Jim Anelli, who heads LeClairRyan's Affordable Care Act team about the latest developments involving the ACA.
XpertHR provides an insider's look at a Supreme Court case that asks if an employer may deny contraceptive coverage to its employees on religious grounds under the Affordable Care Act. Hear why this might be the most significant dispute of the Court's term.
The Affordable Care Act (ACA) is one of the most significant workplace laws of the last couple of decades. Adding to the law's complexity are the ever-changing requirements to the employer shared responsibility rules. This webinar will explore those requirements and the compliance challenges they create.
Tabatha George of Fisher Phillips, a national labor and employment law firm, explains the effects of the Windsor decision on employee benefit plans, including the impact of the new regulations and guidance issued by the DOL and IRS.
XpertHR's editorial team breaks down the Supreme Court's groundbreaking gay marriage rulings, most notably the decision to strike down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in United States v. Windsor.
The materials and information included in the XpertHR service are provided for reference purposes only. They are not intended either as a substitute for professional advice or judgment or to provide legal or other advice with respect to particular circumstances. Use of the service is subject to our terms and conditions.