The following article was first published on Shipman & Goodwin attorney Daniel Schwartz’ Connecticut Employment Law blog. It is reposted here with permission.

As I’ve said in prior posts, the General Assembly isn’t exactly precise at times when writing legislation. (One is reminded by the quote regarding sausage making.)

One issue that pops up from time to time is whether an employer need be “Connecticut-based” to be covered by Connecticut state laws, particularly as it applies to employment laws.

The Office of Legislative Research—one of my favorite underappreciated government agencies—recently released an entire memo of the subject that’s worth a read for anyone trying to figure out the scope of a particular law.

The precise issue that it covers? Do the state’s labor statutes use “Connecticut-based” or similar terminology as a criteria (1) for an employer or employee’s eligibility for any programs or benefits, or (2) to impose any legal obligations on an employer or employee?

The OLR concludes as follows:

• Connecticut’s labor statutes (Title 31 of the General Statutes) do not explicitly use the term “Connecticut-based” as a criteria (1) for an employer or employee’s eligibility for any programs or benefits or (2) to impose any legal obligations on an employer or employee. However, many of these statutes require that an employer or employee be “in Connecticut,” “in the state,” or “in this state,” to qualify for a particular program or to be covered by a particular...

Read Full Story: https://news.google.com/__i/rss/rd/articles/CBMiP2h0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmNiaWEuY29tL...