WIRTW #475 (the “girls rock” edition)

I’m not sure why, but when I pictured having a daughter I always imagined that she’d be into and frilly things, Barbies, and ballet. I guess it’s because it’s “what girls do”? This is so not Norah. She is a rock ‘n’ roll chick. She loves punk music, flannel shirts, the color black, and her telecaster. And I could not be more proud of her.

And she’s also a girl, playing in what has predominantly been a male dominated space. She’s even newly fronting a band of four guys (stay tuned, more on this exciting news in the coming weeks).

Thankfully, she’s always had really strong female role models at School of Rock (thank you Quinn, Erin, Kayleigh, Maddie, and Taylor). I’m also always on the lookout for new female-led bands for her to check out. That’s how we discovered Diet Cig, for example, and I recently discovered The Regrettes (fronted by a 16-year-old, another band worthy of your attention).

For these reasons, a story the New York Times ran last week caught my eye. Rock’s Not Dead, It’s Ruled by Women is a roundtable discussion with 8 women rockers, including Alex Luciano from the aforementioned Diet Cig, Shawna Potter of War on Women (one of Norah’s recent discoveries, thanks to her SoR Punk show), and Sadie Dupuis of Speedy Ortiz. They discuss their role as women working in a male dominated industry, their responsibility as role models, and how gender-based stereotypes still dominate and resonate.

It’s a great read.

As for my 11-year-old rocker (and her 9-year-old brother), they have shows coming up in the next two weeks:

• Sept. 17, Donovan does The Beatles at 3 pm, and Norah does punk at 5 pm.
• Sept. 23, Donovan re-does The Beatles at 1 pm, and Norah the punk thing at 3 pm.

All shows are at Slim & Chubby’s, 12492 Prospect Rd., Strongsville.

Here’s what else I read this week:

Baring it all on social media and hiring

I’ve never written about the time I stripped naked in front of my entire law school … until now.

Well, here we go.

Dads are parents, too — baby bonding and sex discrimination

Should new dad’s receive the same amount of time off from work to bond with their newly born child as do women? That is the question at the center of a lawsuit the EEOC recently filed against cosmetics giant Estée Lauder.

Is the DOL’s white-collar salary test DOA?

Late last week, a federal judge in Texas struck down the Department of Labor’s attempt to raise the salary test for the Fair Labor Standards Act’s white-collar exemptions from $455 per week to $913 per week.

The court held that because the statute defines the administrative, executive, and professional exemptions based on their duties, any salary test that renders the duties irrelevant to the analysis is invalid. Thus, because the Obama-era $913 salary test could overshadow the exemption’s duties in the execution of the exemptions, the new salary level is invalid.

I founds footnotes 5 and 6 to be very interesting, but I’m not sure the position they advance are intellectually consistent with the bulk of the opinion.

Compare:

This opinion is not making any assessments regarding the general lawfulness of the salary-level test or the Department’s authority to implement such a test. Instead, the Court is evaluating only the salary-level test as amended by the Department’s Final Rule. ... During questioning at the preliminary injunction hearing, the Court suggested it would be permissible if the Department adjusted the 2004 salary level for inflation. [fns. 5 and 6]

-vs-

The Final Rule more than doubles the previous minimum salary level. By raising the salary level in this manner, the Department effectively eliminates a consideration of whether an employee performs “bona fide executive, administrative, or professional capacity” duties. ... Nothing in Section 213(a)(1) allows the Department to make salary rather than an employee’s duties determinative of whether a “bona fide executive, administrative, or professional capacity” employee should be exempt from overtime pay. [opinion]

To me, the only way to read the opinion is that any salary test exceeds the DOL’s authority to implement the EAP exemptions (fns. 5 and 6 notwithstanding). Alternatively, if the only salary test that will pass muster is one that is so low that anyone who meets the duties test also must, de facto, meet the minimum salary threshold (the status quo of $455, adjusted for inflation to $592), why have a salary test at all?

Thus, in the opinion of this blogger, the DOL’s salary test is DOA. Now, let’s wait for the appeal and see what the court of appeals has to say on this issue.

WIRTW #474 (the “I’m from” edition)

My 11 year old daughter is a unique soul. She’s always been older and wiser than her years suggest, but I don’t think I’ve ever appreciated exactly how much older or wiser until I read her “I’m from” poem.

She just entered 6th grade, and this poem was her first ever middle-school assignment. This year's language arts curriculum is focused around the idea of identity. Her assignment was to craft a poem defining her own personal identity—where she’s from.

The result floored me. I cried real tears. Not just out of joy that my 11-year-old could produce something of such beauty, but that this beauty reflects a deep understanding of who she is.

So perfectly Norah.

Here’s what else I read this week.

BREAKING: federal judge strikes down FLSA white-collar exemption salary test

Ding, dong, the DOL’s salary test for white collar exemptions is dead (sort of).

A Texas federal judge has held that the Department of Labor improperly used a salary-level test to determine which white-collar workers are exempt from overtime compensation.

That time Justin Bieber’s “L’il Biebers” caused a sex discrimination lawsuit

File this one under the category of I can’t make this stuff up. Apparently, Justin Bieber’s testicles are at the center of a recently filed sex discrimination lawsuit.