Compliance Round Up – A Six-Figure H-1B Fee Proposal, Connecticut’s October Deadline, and Two Rulings on Post-Complaint Conduct

Headshot of Jennifer Kieswetter
Written By
Jennifer Kiesewetter
Published On: August 31, 2026

Jenny Kiesewetter is a practicing ERISA and employee benefits attorney who partners with HR teams on a wide range of workplace compliance matters — from benefit-plan obligations to day-to-day HR policies and regulatory requirements. Her guidance helps employers spot risks early, navigate regulatory change, and make informed decisions that support both employees and the organization.

—

Washington proposed a per-hire immigration fee larger than most salaries, the labor board’s top lawyer published her hit list, and Connecticut’s omnibus workforce act starts running October 1. Two federal appeals courts landed on the same theme: what an employer writes after a complaint can matter more than the decision itself.

Federal News

Effective Date: Announced August 24, 2026, published in the Federal Register August 25. Comments due September 24, 2026.

What’s Changing

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), through U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), issued a notice of proposed rulemaking creating a $103,265 fee, payable at filing, on every cap-subject H-1B petition. It reaches the 20,000-slot advanced-degree exemption and sits on top of existing filing fees rather than replacing any. An employer subject to both this fee and a Presidential Proclamation payment would owe both, though a district court vacated the $100,000 Proclamation payment in June as a tax Congress never authorized, and that appeal is pending in the First Circuit.

Cap-exempt petitions from universities and nonprofit research organizations stay outside it. DHS says the money would recover a share of the government-wide cost of running the immigration system across DHS, Justice, State, and Labor, and projects roughly $8.8 billion a year if the full 85,000-petition cap files. Its own impact analysis concedes a significant economic effect on 76% of the small entities it studied, roughly 11,051 businesses. DHS hasn’t finalized it.

What This Means for HR:

  • Model your next cap season against a six-figure per-hire cost before registration opens.
  • If the fee would reshape your entry-level hiring, comment by September 24 and put a dollar figure on it.
  • Reassess cap-exempt affiliations, O-1 and L-1 alternatives, and green card timing with counsel now.

Effective Date: Issued August 26, 2026.

What’s Changing: National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) General Counsel Crystal S. Carey released GC Memorandum 26-04, “Further Guidance Regarding General Counsel Priorities.” The agency’s announcement says the memo explains her positions challenging recent Board precedents and identifies decisions she hopes to argue against later.

The memo names roughly a dozen, several of which already have cases pending. Two cover handbooks and severance agreements. Stericycle, Inc., 372 NLRB No. 113 (2023), governs workplace rules. McLaren Macomb, 372 NLRB No. 58 (2023), held that merely offering a severance agreement with broad confidentiality and non-disparagement clauses violates the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).

Carey chose not to require the NLRB’s regional offices to send any of these cases to Washington for review, so they keep handling charges on their own. None of this changes the law yet. The General Counsel decides which cases to bring, but only the Board can overturn a precedent, and the newly seated Board hasn’t.

What This Means for HR:

  • Keep complying with current Board law, because none of these precedents has moved.
  • Flag with counsel the confidentiality and non-disparagement clauses you stripped in 2023.
  • Build separation agreements in modular clauses so one provision can switch on or off later.

Trending State News

Effective Date: Signed May 11, 2026. Most employment provisions effective October 1, 2026; contractor wage liability January 1, 2027; service contractor retention July 1, 2027.

What’s Changing: House Bill 5003, enacted as Public Act 26-12, runs 75 sections. Job postings carry the heaviest lift. Connecticut employers must include both a wage range and a general description of benefits, covering health insurance, retirement, fringe benefits, paid leave, and other compensation, in every public and internal posting. Few templates handle the benefits piece, so employers already complying with pay range laws elsewhere still have work to do. Lactation break time now sits on top of meal and rest breaks instead of running inside them.

The two 2027 dates need work before then. General contractors become jointly liable for a subcontractor’s unpaid wages on contracts executed on or after January 1, 2027, and an employee can sue after 30 days’ notice. Beginning July 1, 2027, successor service contractors at covered sites must retain the predecessor’s employees for 90 days, with written offers due at least 5 days before the predecessor’s contract ends and penalties of $500 to $1,000 per employee per day.

What This Means for HR:

  • Rebuild Connecticut posting templates before October 1 to carry the wage range and a benefits summary.
  • Separate lactation break time from meal and rest periods in your timekeeping rules.
  • Price subcontractor wage exposure into Connecticut construction contracts you expect to sign in 2027.

Around the Courts

Decided: August 13, 2026.

What’s Changing: In Stewart v. GES Recycling South Carolina LLC, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, No. 24-1523, a Black driver clashed with his manager over racial harassment, drew a one-day suspension, put his complaint in writing the next day, and lost his job a week after that. The panel affirmed summary judgment on his hostile work environment and race discrimination claims, but vacated it on retaliatory discharge under 42 U.S.C. Section 1981.

At the termination meeting, the company told him he was fired for the way he talked to his manager. He took that to mean the profanity he doesn’t dispute using. Once the case was filed, the company said the real reason was belligerent and insubordinate conduct that went well beyond profanity, conduct the driver says never happened. Relying on Wannamaker-Amos v. Purem Novi, Inc., 126 F.4th 244 (4th Cir. 2025), the court found a jury could decide that reason was either untrue or a later invention. Judge Quattlebaum dissented.

What This Means for HR:

  • Record the termination rationale the day you decide, and keep every later filing consistent with it.
  • Say the same thing in your position statement that you said in the termination meeting.
  • Train managers to document incidents completely at the time, not months later.

Decided: August 25, 2026.

What’s Changing: In Russo v. New Hampshire Neurospine Institute, P.A., an 11-year physician assistant was fired after a surgeon told the practice he would leave if she stayed. The partners voted to terminate her but let her keep working through a transition period while they negotiated her exit. Her lawyer then sent a demand letter alleging gender bias, and the practice ended her employment three days later.

The court upheld summary judgment on her sex discrimination claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and New Hampshire RSA 354-A, and on the aiding and abetting claim against the surgeon. It reversed on retaliation against the practice. Two rulings reach beyond this employer. Cutting the transition period short after the demand letter arrived counts as a materially adverse action, even though the decision to fire her came a month earlier. So does pulling a post-employment contractor arrangement the employer never had to offer in the first place. What made the case was an instant message the executive director sent a colleague: “Sorry but I’ve had to tell [Russo] she is done. She is making allegations that are unacceptable and demanding a large sum of money.” That message, paired with the executive director telling Russo her termination came “in light of the situation,” was what sent the retaliation claim to a jury.

What This Means for HR:

  • Freeze the exit terms once a demand letter arrives, and change nothing without counsel.
  • Remind leadership that a note to a colleague explaining a decision can become the plaintiff’s best exhibit.
  • Treat voluntary post-employment arrangements as protected once a complaint lands.

—

The information contained in this site is provided for informational purposes only, and should not be construed as legal advice on any subject matter.