Photo of Jarad M. Lucan

Jarad is chair of Shipman's Employment and Labor Practice Group, where he practices on behalf of both public and private sector clients.  Jarad has successfully represented employers in grievance arbitration matters, prohibited practice proceedings before the State Board of Labor Relations, and unfair labor practice proceedings before the National Labor Relations Board.  He has also represented employers in cases involving claims of discrimination and retaliation before the Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and State and Federal Courts.

Connecticut has a host of new employment laws that take effect October 1, 2021. However, one new law will add a significant layer of complexity for employers, particularly in the hiring process.

Under Connecticut’s new law, employers are prohibited from failing or refusing to provide a job applicant with the “wage range” of the position

With the COVID-19 Delta variant on the rise and the FDA’s recent approval of the Pfizer vaccine, employers are once again reviewing their policies and considering making vaccines mandatory in the workplace.  This complimentary webinar will provide employers with a better understanding of the legal and practical considerations of mandatory vaccine policies and address frequently

On June 4, 2021, Governor Lamont signed into law Public Act 21-25, which is effective October 1, 2021.  This Act, entitled “An Act Concerning Access to Certain Public Employees by The Exclusive Bargaining Representative of a Public Employer Bargaining Unit,” sets forth new obligations on public employers in Connecticut regarding union access to their employees

The American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARPA) was signed into law on March 11, 2021, by President Joseph Biden.  The ARPA makes several important changes to the benefits first created in the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA). These changes become effective April 1, 2021, and employers must determine how the ARPA affects their

On December 27, 2020, after months of negotiations, Congress passed and the President signed The Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Applications Act, a 5,593-page appropriations bill which provides several forms of stimulus related to COVID-19. Many employers are wondering what effect the new law has on the paid leave provisions of the Families First Coronavirus

In a newly released decision that may interest public employers, the Connecticut Supreme Court concluded that binding interest arbitration awards under the Municipal Employee Relations Act (“MERA”) are not subject to applications to confirm an arbitration award.

In the case Brass City Local, CACP v. City of Waterbury, the city and its police union

Jarad Lucan will present the session, “Preparing for Connecticut’s Paid Family Medical Leave Insurance Program” during the Connecticut Conference of Independent Colleges (CCIC) Annual Member Forum.

On June 25, 2019, Connecticut passed legislation to create a comprehensive paid family and medical leave insurance program (PFMLI Program), which becomes effective January 1, 2021. This informative presentation

During the month of October, we hosted one webinar a week that featured discussions on timely topics and updates on recent legislation and court decisions affecting employers. If you were unable to attend the live webinars, they are now available to view On-Demand.

We invite you to register for any of the complimentary On-Demand CLE

Join us as we take our annual fall seminar virtual! For the month of October, we will be hosting one webinar a week that will feature timely topics as well as updates on recent legislation and court decisions affecting employers.

We invite you to register for any of the complimentary CLE webinars listed below:

On July 8, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that teachers of religious instruction at private religious schools are barred from bringing employment discrimination claims against their employer. In doing so, the Court clarified and expanded upon the “ministerial exception” previously articulated by the Court in 2012. In 2012, the Court had recognized that religious