‍Editor's Note: This report is based on survey data from February 2025 that was published in March 2025. This is the most recent data available. (Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics)

‍

For two straight months now, US employers have added about 150 thousand new jobs according to initial reports, which is down slightly from the approximate 170 thousand new jobs added monthly over the past year, but not too far off track.

‍

Despite those new payroll entries - only 3 states experienced net growth in total in-state jobs over the month, while the remaining 47 and Washington DC saw no significant change in payroll size.

‍

The national unemployment rate ticked up one-tenth of a percentage point to 4.1%, but Florida was the only state that individually recorded a significant change in unemployment, climbing from 4.5% to 4.6% over the month. 

‍

Below is the breakdown of the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ (BLS) market employment summary from the March 2025 report.

‍

States With the Highest Unemployment Rates

Nevada had the highest unemployment rate for the 4th month in a row, holding steady over the month at 5.8%.

‍

California, Michigan, and Washington DC had the next highest unemployment rates at 5.4% each, followed by Kentucky at 5.3%, with Illinois at 4.8% rounding out the only 6 states with unemployment rates above the national average of 4.1%.

‍

Florida was the only state to see an increase in unemployment rate over the last month, but over the course of the last 12 months, 30 months have seen unemployment rise, with the largest increases recorded by Michigan (plus 1.4%), Mississippi (plus 1.0%), and Colorado (plus 0.8%). 

‍

States With The Lowest Unemployment Rates

South Dakota - holding steady over the month at 1.9% unemployment - continued its streak of claiming the lowest unemployment rate in the country, which now stretches to 14 months. 

‍

North Dakota and Vermont shared the next lowest unemployment rate - both holding steady over the month at 2.6% - followed by Nebrask, New Hampshire, and Hawaii at 3%.

‍

In total last month, 18 states had unemployment rates meaningfully lower than the US average of 4.1%.

‍

Over the last 12 months, 30 states have recorded an increase in unemployment. 

‍

States With New Job Losses

No state recorded significant net job losses over the last month or over the last year.

‍

States With New Job Gains

Missouri, New Jersey, and Ohio were the only states that recorded a net increase in payroll figures last month, growing by 0.4% each, amounting to increases of about 13 thousand, 19 thousand, and 23 thousand jobs, respectively.

‍

Over the last 12 months, 17 states in total have recorded net job additions. The largest proportional gain was recorded in Idaho, which increased its workforce by 2.7% over that time frame, followed by South Carolina and Utah at plus 2% each.

‍

Texas, Florida, and New York had the largest raw number of job gains over the past year at about 14 million, 10 million, and 10 million, respectively.

‍

Mployer’s Take

This market summary represents a positive improvement over last month’s market summary which showed month-to-month net job losses across several states. 

‍

That said, while this data comes from the first full month of the second Trump administration, the economic impacts that will result from the policy changes that accompanied the transfer of power have not yet become apparent in these labor market reports.

‍

It is difficult to pinpoint exactly how many federal workers have been laid off, which some observers claim added up to more than 60 thousand in February alone while the Department of Government Efficiency itself claims that figure is much smaller when voluntary retirements and resignations are taken into account. 

‍

Even less clear are the number of tangential private sector workers whose work is supported by federal employees and/or federal funding that may now be less available and/or less effective than it was in the past, so the secondary effects of federal workforce funding cuts are even further from having worked down the pipeline. 

‍

As a result, the holding pattern continues, and will likely continue for at least another couple of months as Trump wraps up the first 100 days of his second term in April  - the period during which president’s are often most productive in executing their agendas. 

‍

Of course, there is no set deadline at which point the outcomes of these actions will be ultimately evaluated, and the effectiveness of some of those actions may well be a point of differing opinion well into the future.

‍

But the early signs and indications about some of the near-term effects we can reasonably expect from the policy changes that have already been implemented may start to appear in the data as early as next month. 

‍

Looking for more exclusive content? Check out the Mployer blog.

‍

Key Takeaways

• A significant number of major US corporations have been pulling back from Diversity, Equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in recent months in response to perceived changes in political, regulatory, and social perception of these programs.
• Target was an early torchbearer for the DEI cause but has since scaled back its DEI investment, and has been the subject of boycotts and/or lawsuits initiated by groups both supportive and opposed to DEI programs.
• The principles of promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion in the workplace and the advantage of doing so long predate the DEI movement, and while some employers are distancing themselves from DEI language, the intra-organizational groups pursuing the underlying goals of DEI may continue doing so after being reorganized, restructured, and renamed in many cases. 

‍

Target and The Future of DEI

Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) programs experienced a rapid increase in stature followed by a near equally rapid rise in pushback over the last 5 years. Perhaps no company has felt that whiplash more than multi-category retail giant Target, whose experience provides an excellent case study to understand what has been happening with DEI policy as well as what will happen next. 

‍

Over the course of February 2025, Target found itself on the receiving end of a class action lawsuit brought by shareholders who claim Target’s pro-DEI policies led to significant losses of stock value, while at the same time, facing a targeted boycott led by pro-DEI supporters who aim to punish Target for rolling back some of those very same DEI policies that led to the class action suit.

‍

If they were aiming to find themselves between a rock and a hard place, it looks like Target may have hit the bullseye. 

‍

While the momentum certainly appears to have shifted against DEI policies over the last couple of years, the coming months and years will likely be even more instrumental in determining the ultimate fate of the DEI movement and whether the accompanying programs will be retired, resurrected, or if they will simply be reorganized to continue the mission of promoting the principles of diversity, equity and inclusion under a different acronym. 

‍

Target and The Rise of DEI

The roots of modern DEI programs date back to the summer of 2020 when George Floyd was killed less than 10 minutes from Target’s headquarters in Minneapolis, and that proximity was a significant factor in inspiring Target to lead the way in mainstream corporate DEI adoption.

‍

In response to that incident and the resulting movement which turned the spotlight around on systemic racism and other prejudice, Target pledged to establish a Racial Equity Action and Change committee, increase its proportion of black employees by 20%, and spend more than $2 billion dollars with black-owned businesses. 

‍

Of course, Target was not alone in joining the DEI bandwagon, with one McKinsey study estimating that companies worldwide spent about $7.5 billion on DEI-related expenditures in 2020, and as recently as early 2023 that figure was projected to double to $15.4 billion by 2026.

‍

Over the course of 2023, however, DEI program adoption seemed to have hit a peak according to a study from Paradigm, which estimated that 54% of US companies budgeted for DEI program expenditures in 2023, which was down from 58% who had done so in 2022. 

‍

While the percentage of companies that had a specific DEI strategy fell by an even greater margin between 2022 and 2023 (minus 9%), 2023 wasn’t all bad news for DEI programs given that the percentage of US firms with senior DEI leadership roles increased by 6% over the year, and an additional 3% began tracking race representation in the lines of business of each of their executives. 

‍

2023 also happens to be the year in which most of the DEI-related activities and relevant events alleged in the class action suit against Target took place.

City of Riviera Beach Police Pension Fund vs. Target

On the last day of January 2025, the police pension fund for the city of Riviera Beach, Florida initiated a class action suit in federal court against Target claiming that Target’s DEI-related activities were a violation of the Securities Exchange Act.

‍

According to the complaint, Target defrauded shareholders by failing to disclose the risks associated with their DEI (and ESG) mandates, which made Target’s share price artificially high as a result, so that anyone who purchased Target stock during the period of artificial inflation should be due compensation (August 26, 2022, through November 19, 2024).

‍

The lawsuit alleges that those theoretical DEI risks became real losses in May 2023 when a boycott was staged against Target due to its Pride campaign, which resulted in a drop in stock price of almost 25% from the middle of May 2023 to the Middle of June 2023, as well as a 5% drop in sales during the second quarter of 2023, which caused another 15% stock price reduction when those sales figures were released in mid-August 2023.

‍

Proceedings will continue in April 2025 after the notice period for potential lead plaintiffs to come forward has concluded.

New Pro-DEI Target Boycott Emerges

Exactly one week before the Riviera Beach police pension fund initiated its civil complaint in federal court, Target announced that it would be concluding its 3-year diversity equity and inclusion goals and would not be renewing its Racial Equity Action and Change initiatives.

‍

The seemingly abrupt end of those programs was quickly followed by calls for a new boycott of Target, this time led by pro-DEI groups like the Racial Justice Network and churches, which has resulted in Target’s inclusion among a group of US companies that were subject to a 1-day blackout boycott on the last day of February 2025 and calls for an additional boycott of Target over the Lent holiday from March 5 through April 17, 2025.

‍

In short, Target is still in the middle of the storm - the stock price has fallen by more than 18% in the time since the announced closure of these DEI programs and this writing (March 11, 2025), 15% of which occurred before the major market corrections of the past week -  and the accompanying loss of sales won’t be reported until June when the stock price is likely to take another substantial hit depending on how effective, widespread, and lasting/repeated the boycotts are.

‍

And Target is not the only company facing these boycotts and/or threats of boycotts, nor is it the only one backing away from previous DEI positions and commitments.

‍

Corporate America and the Decline of DEI

Forbes constructed a timeline that documents how US companies have been responding to the changing DEI environment, which taken as a whole highlights just how quickly the momentum against DEI initiatives has developed.

‍

In the spring of 2024, Harley Davidson ended some of its DEI-related activities. A few months later in mid-summer of 2024, John Deere announced that it would remove from company materials any messages that were socially motivated, and it would no longer support certain cultural awareness events like pride parades. 

‍

Over the next several months leading up to the 2024 election, several major corporations - including Lowes, Boeing, Coors, Ford, and Jack Daniels manufacturer Brown-Forman - followed suit and rolled back DEI initiatives in one way or another, ranging from no longer participating in diversity surveys to removing DEI-related goals, either as benchmarks for internal incentives or external suppliers.

‍

In the months following the election in November 2024 and especially over the course of February 2025, however, the corporate DEI revision/excision began gaining significant steam, with Walmart altering its DEI commitments, McDonald’s adjusting diversity-related goals, Meta abandoning some diversity initiatives and pro-inclusivity training, and Amazon stating in an internal memo that they would be moving on some outdated practices and language, which some people interpreted to reference DEI practices.

‍

When President Trump took office and began releasing executive orders - including a now-on-hold order that limited the use of DEI initiatives by federal employers and federal contractors - the number of US employers who began backtracking from previously imposed programs and policies that promoted diversity and inclusion grew substantially, with Target obviously, as well as Google, Amtrak, Accenture, Chipotle, Coca-Cola, Pepsi, GM, GE, Intel, Paypal, Deloitte, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, BlackRock, Bank of America, Paramount, Comcast, Warner Brothers, Disney, and PBS all joining the ranks of companies that made changes to their DEI policies and practices just in the final week of January through the beginning of March 2025.

‍

Some of those employers are federal contractors and are taking proactive steps to comply with the new regulations, while others aren’t necessarily required to reduce DEI but are choosing to do so nonetheless. 

‍

At the same time, however, some organizations - whether subject to the new DEI-limiting orders or not - may be making superficial changes to their DEI language in compliance with new standards while maintaining a commitment to the principles of diversity, equity, and inclusion, and it remains to be seen how this strategy will play out in practice. 

‍

Mployer’s Take

Target’s situation perfectly encapsulates some of the pitfalls that come with serving a broad consumer base during polarized times, and it has apparently disappointed parties situated on both sides of the line in the sand as a result.

‍

One potential takeaway from Target’s situation is that supporting any issue  - even one that may seem to garner broad public support - ultimately may have the potential to cause a negative counteraction among a substantial portion of your consumer base nonetheless.

‍

In that light, the Target story may look like a cautionary tale about the difficulty of knowing when to hold on and when to let go as the social pendulum is swinging.

‍

Target clearly didn’t ‘time the market’ right in terms of minimizing backlash to its adoption/scaling-back of DEI work, but it is not at all clear yet that the flurry of companies that have abandoned DEI initiatives over the past couple of months have ‘timed the market’ any better. If predicting social trends were easy, these companies wouldn’t have to be backtracking on their DEI programs in the first place. 

‍

Although the DEI brand has clearly suffered over the past couple of years, the bigger story of building diversity, equity, and inclusion in the workplace dates back to long before 2020, and while it is not yet clear whether “DEI” as a department/buzzword/scapegoat is becoming obsolete, the principles that DEI represents are certainly not.

‍

McDonald’s changed the name of its Global DEI Center of Excellence to the Global Inclusion team a couple of months ago to distance itself from the DEI label, similar to Walmart renaming its Chief Diversity Officer to its Chief Belonging Officer a couple of years ago.

‍

That said, Target similarly renamed its supplier diversity team (which became its supplier engagement team) when it announced the conclusion of its DEI initiatives, but given the subsequent backlash and boycotts from pro-DEI groups, however, Target may have been better off not going out of its way to so openly distance the company from the word diversity as the other DEI initiatives concluded - which further underscores the difficulty of timing the pendulum swing. It is a very hard target to hit.

‍

Editor's Note: This report is based on survey data from January 2025 that was published in March 2025. This is the most recent data available. (Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics)‍

Nearly 150 thousand jobs were added by US employers in February - the month when this data was collected - and the national unemployment rate fell by one-tenth of a point to 4%.

‍

Looking at the state data, however, there was very little movement of significance in state unemployment levels, with the exception of Pennsylvania which recorded a 0.1% increase in state unemployment, rising from 3.7% to 3.8%. 

‍

Similarly, despite the net job additions, no state recorded a significant increase in payroll figures, but 4 states actually saw a reduction in in-state employment: Georgia, Missouri, and West Virginia, which all recorded a 0.6% decrease in employment, and Indiana, which recorded a 0.4% decrease.

‍

Below is the breakdown of the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ (BLS) market employment summary for February 2025.

‍

States With the Highest Unemployment Rates

For the third month in a row, Nevada had the highest unemployment rate, which is up slightly at 5.8%, followed by California at 5.4%, which is down from 5.5% the month before.

‍

Washington DC, Kentucky, and Michigan all came in at 5.3% unemployment, but Washington DC is dropping while Kentucky and Michigan are seeing unemployment climb.

‍

Illinois - at 4.9% unemployment - was the only other state above the national average of 4% during February.

‍

Over the last year, 32 states have recorded an increase in unemployment, the largest of which was reported in Michigan, which saw its level of unemployment rise from 4.0% to 5.3% between January 2024 and January 2025.

‍

Colorado and South Carolina also saw a significant increase in unemployment over the course of the last 12 months when both saw a 0.9% increase, while Mississippi and Wyoming fared nearly as poorly at plus 0.8% unemployment.

‍

States With The Lowest Unemployment Rates

As we entered the new year, South Dakota held steady at 1.9% unemployment and continued its streak of maintaining the lowest unemployment rate in the country, which stretches for 13 consecutive months now. 

‍

North Dakota and Vermont had the next lowest unemployment levels at 2.6%, followed by Montana at 2.8% and Nebraska and New Hampshire at 2.9%.

‍

17 states in total had unemployment rates below the national average.

‍

Over the last 12 months, only Montana and Washington state have registered decreases in unemployment at 0.2% and 0.3%, respectively.

‍

States With New Job Losses

Georgia had the largest net loss in jobs, recording a net decrease in its workforce of more than 28 thousand over the course of the month, which represents a 0.6% decrease.

‍

Missouri and West Virginia each recorded workforce reductions of 0.6% as well, though the net job losses at minus 17 thousand and about minus 4 thousand, respectively, were much smaller than in Georgia due to their relatively smaller populations.

‍

Indiana also saw a reduction in its workforce, which amounted to a drop of about 0.4% and amounted to a little less than 13 thousand jobs. 

‍

States With New Job Gains

No state saw statistically significant job gains over the month, although 17 states did record net increases in jobs over the last year.

‍

Alaska and Idaho had the largest percentage gains in workforce size at plus 2.8% over the year, followed by Texas at 2.4% and Utah at 2.1%.

‍

Texas, Florida, and New York saw the largest number of net new jobs over the last 12 months at about plus 14 thousand, 10 thousand, and 10 thousand respectively. 

‍

Mployer’s Take

Due to the timing of the latest state release from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, this report came out much later than usual relative to the collection of the data that the report is based on, and we’ll actually be getting updated data from the states by the end of the week at this point.

‍

In fact, we’ve already seen follow-up data on the employment situation nationally, which showed the unemployment rate tick up by a tenth of a point despite the addition of another 150 thousand jobs to US payrolls. 

‍

On Friday when we get new state employment data again, it will likely look very similar to this set, although it will be interesting and informative to see which additional states start to see their unemployment rates moving in the wrong direction.

‍

But in terms of the bigger picture, our analysis and the economy itself in many ways are in a holding pattern in the short term as the policy changes overseen by the new administration begin to manifest and the real-world impacts become more clear. 

‍

We’ll check in after the new data is made available later this week, and it’s possible there will be additional noteworthy developments between now and then - potentially including additional stock market volatility and/or new policy announcements - but barring major unforeseen developments, the next report will closely resemble this one.

‍

It will take a bit more time before the full momentum and trajectory of the US economy can fully respond to policy changes that have already occurred - not to mention whatever additional changes may be in store - but we’ll be keeping an eye out in the meantime for noteworthy markers pointing toward what’s to come as they start to appear.

‍

Looking for more exclusive content? Check out the Mployer blog.

‍

Editor's Note: This report is based on survey data from February 2025 that was published in March 2025. This is the most recent data available. (Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics)

‍

US employers added 151 thousand jobs last month, which was just short of the predicted 160 to 170 thousand and just over the 143 thousand jobs initially reported last month, while there was very little movement in the unemployment rate, rising by less than one-tenth of a point to 4.1%.

‍

There was very little movement in most of the employment metrics, although the employment-population ratio fell by two-tenths of a point to 59.9% - which is only the second time this figure has fallen below 60% since November of 2022 (this ratio was 59.8% in November 2024).

‍

The biggest changes occurred in the number of people who were employed part-time for economic reasons, which grew by almost 11% from under 4.5 million to over 4.9 million, and the number of people who are unemployed but want a job rose buy more than 7.5% to 5.9 million, which may be the strongest indications of a softening labor market in an otherwise largely stable report.

‍

The healthcare industry added the largest number of jobs at 52 thousand, which is right in line with the 54 thousand jobs the healthcare industry has added on average each of the previous 12 months.

‍

The financial services industry added the next largest number of jobs at 21 thousand, which is more than 4 times greater than the 5 thousand job additions the industry had added on average over the last year, while the transportation & warehousing industry added about 18 thousand jobs, well above the current 13 thousand monthly average, and the social assistance industry added about 11 thousand jobs, which is a little less than half of the running monthly average.

‍

The leisure and hospitality industry recorded a net loss of about 16 thousand jobs, while the retail industry saw a decrease of 6 thousand jobs, and there were about 10 thousand net government jobs lost over the course of the month.

‍

Average hourly pay rose by about 10 cents to $35.93 per hour (an increase of 0.3%), while the length of the average workweek held steady at 34.1 hours per week. 

‍

Mployer’s Take

This report represents the first set of employment situation data collected exclusively under the second Trump administration, but the next few months are when we’ll begin really seeing more direct impacts from the resulting changes in policies, and it will take another several months beyond that before many of the tangential effects become more apparent.

‍

In the meantime, the Chairman of the Federal Reserve says the economy is in good shape, and reiterated the Fed’s wait-and-see approach with interest rate cuts. While the Fed cut rates by a quarter percentage point 3 times next year, and analysts and investors are still predicting another 2 or 3 comparable rate cuts in 2025, the Fed has indicated it is in no hurry to continue cutting rates, especially in light of the 4% annual wage growth over the trailing twelve months. 

‍

The assumed interest rate cuts may be in part based on the increasing likelihood of economic downturn if not recession on the horizon, which more economists are predicting within the next year than were doing so just a couple of months ago. Should such a downturn materialize, it will likely inspire the Fed to act quickly in bringing down rates.

‍

While some of the new administration’s federal workforce cuts may be reflected in the data of this latest report, most of the cuts made so far and the impact of those cuts, as well as the complementary private job losses, won’t begin showing up in this report until next month.

‍

Those disruptions to the labor market combined with uncertainty about consumer goods prices and international trade in part due to tariffs and tariff posturing, have led to predictions of significant GDP contraction of almost 2.5% in the first quarter of 2025 by at least one Federal Reserve Bank. 

‍

There are a lot of moving parts that will ultimately shape the short-term economic future, and those kinds of dynamic systems are difficult to predict even without so many potential variables in flux both domestically and internationally.

‍

That said, as more economic analysts are becoming more pessimistic in their predictions, it is worth considering that trend as a data point worth taking into account in its own right, and we'll continue updating the outlook as more data comes in in the coming months.

‍

Check out the Mployer blog here.

‍Each month, Mployer collects and presents some of the most relevant and most pressing recent changes in law, compliance, and policy in areas related to employee benefits, health care, and human resources.

‍

Alternative Manner For 1095-B & 1095-C Distribution

If your organization is using the alternative method for distributing 1095-B and 1095-C forms in accordance with the Paperwork Burden Reduction Act, your website must be in compliance from the first business day of March through at least October 15th. You can find guidance from the IRS about how to properly follow compliance protocols here.

‍

DEI Executive Orders Paused

On February 21, 2025, a federal judge put a stay on Trump’s Executive Order limiting the ability of federal agencies and federal contractors to operate Diversity Equity and Inclusion programs. The court questioned whether the order violated free speech rights and potentially illegally restricted otherwise legal actions taken by private entities. You can find the decision here. 

‍

Form 300A Submission Due

From February 1st to April 30th, non-exempt (low-hazard) employers who had at least 11 employees at some point in 2024 must post in a conspicuous place a copy of OSHA Form 300A, Summary of Work-Related Illness and Injury, certified by a company executive.

‍

For non-exempt employers that had 250 or more employees at some point last year and employers with 20 or more employees in specified high-risk industries, OSHA requires electronic submissions, which are due by March 2nd, 2025. 

‍

You can find the electronic submission platform here. 

‍

Executive Orders

In his first days since returning to office, President Trump has signed a series of executive orders dealing with labor and employment issues for federal employees and federal contractors, with more expected still to come.

‍

While thus far these orders don’t apply to private employers in general - with the exception of those that accept federal funds and/or are federal contractors - these orders will not only affect a sizable portion of the workforce directly, but they will also likely inspire some private employers to modify their practices and follow the example set by the executive branch.

‍

The new rule that will most likely have the largest impact beyond the sphere of federal employees is Executive Order 11246, which makes it so that federal contractors no longer have to practice affirmative action in the hiring process for most protected classes. The only protected classes excepted from the order are veterans and individuals with disabilities, for whom affirmative action standards still apply. 

‍

Although federal contractors will no longer be required to maintain affirmative action programs, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act remains in effect to prevent discrimination against protected classes like race, gender, sexual orientation, and national identity. 

‍

You can read more here

‍

Spence v. American Airlines

A Federal District Court Judge in Northern Texas ruled that American Airlines had breached its fiduciary duty by working with an investment manager that promoted ESG practices in a way that ran counter to the economic interests of the employee retirement fund beneficiaries.

‍

The repercussions of this ruling could be industry-reshaping if upheld, although there were many additional conflicts of interest between American Airlines and their investment fund manager that may limit how broadly applicable the ruling will ultimately prove to be.

‍

The judge has already found American Airlines in breach of their fiduciary duty, but he has yet to assess damages, which will influence the probability of appeal and the likelihood of copycat cases.

‍

You can read more about this case here.

‍

EAD Extension Formalized

As of January 13, 2025, the extension period for certain renewal Employee Authorization Document (EAD) applications filed on May 4, 2022 or later has been formalized at 540 days.

‍

You can read more here.

IRS Mileage Reimbursement Rate Increased

As of January 1, 2025, the IRS mileage reimbursement rate for road miles driven for business purposes increased by 3 cents per mile from 67 to 70 cents per mile driven. 

‍

PCORI Fee Increase

The IRS released a statement announcing a 25-cent increase in Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute fees for covered plan years ending on or after October 1, 2024, and before October 1, 2025. 

‍

The new fee is $3.47 per covered life.

‍

You can read more here. 

‍

DOL Reinstates Simplified Tip Credit Rule

In response to a Federal Court of Appeals Decision that vacated the so-called 80/20/30 rule that was instituted in 2021, the Department of Labor officially reverted to the previous tip credit rule.

‍

You can read more here.

‍

Increased ACA Flexibility and Affordability Threshold

In the final days before Christmas a few weeks ago, the Employer Reporting Improvement Act both became law. 

‍

As of January 1, 2025, the threshold for what qualifies as affordable coverage is now 9.02%, which means that an employee’s required contribution to the plan can be no more than 9.02% of their salary in order for the plan to be considered affordable and to avoid potentially paying the penalty. 

‍

You can read more about the affordability threshold here.

‍

EAP & Highly Compensated Exception Update

A federal court in Texas determined that the Department of Labor exceeded its authority last summer by increasing the minimum pay thresholds for employees to qualify under the executive, administrative, and professional and highly-compensated employee exceptions to minimum wage and overtime protections. 

‍

Those minimum pay thresholds have reverted to their prior levels - back to $684 per week for the EAP exemption (down from $844 per week under the now defunct rule), and back to $107,432 per year for the HCE exemption (down from $132,964 per year under the now defunct rule). 

‍

NLRB Says No Captive Audience Meetings on Unionization Issues

‍

The National Labor Relations Board has issued a decision prohibiting employers from forcing employees under threat of punishment to attend meetings during which the employer will share views on unionization or its impacts. 

‍

Employers are allowed, however, to convene employees and share their views on unionization and potential impacts so long as employees are not disciplined or adversely affected in any way for not attending (or leaving early). Employers should not even keep or maintain such attendance records.

‍

You can read more here. 

‍

State Updates

Massachusetts: Employers with more than 50 employees must post the new veterans services poster that was just released by the Massachusett Executive Office of Labor and Workforce Development. The poster must be conspicuously displayed in an area that is accessible to all employees. You can find the poster here. 

‍

New York: Beginning March 2, 2025, all New York employers will be prohibited from requiring job applicants to provide a copy of their criminal history record, which closes a loophole employers had been exploiting to obtain such records despite restrictions regulating their access to those records.

‍

Beginning May 8, 2025, NY employers with more than 3 employees must conspicuously post their lactation room accommodation policies and guidelines as well as the relevant state requirements both somewhere accessible by all employees and on the organization's intranet if applicable.

‍

Beginning June 2, 2025, employers with 10 or more retail employees must have in place a written policy and training program for violence prevention measures and retail employers with 500 or more employees must install and/or maintain silent response buttons to alert authorities about emergencies. This legislation was originally slated to take effect March 4, 2025, But was amended to clarify employer responsibilities.

‍

Further, as of January 1, 2025, New York employers are required to provide 20 hours of paid prenatal leave during a 52 week period. Also, as of the new year, the characteristics to which equal protection was extended via the New York State Human Rights Law and the resulting protections are formally enshrined in the New York State Constitution. Those characteristics include: age, disability, ethnicity, gender identity, gender expression, national origin, pregnancy, and anything else related to reproductive healthcare.

‍

New York employers that receive criminal history records for applicants and employees must also now provide those applicants and employees with a copy of those records and a copy of the applicable New York corrections law as well as an opportunity to correct any inaccurate information that may be contained in those records.

‍

Colorado: The City of Boulder increased the minimum wage to $15.57 ($12.55 for tipped employees) as of January 1, 2025.

‍

Oregon: As of January 1, 2025, Paid Leave Oregon provides leave for employees completing necessary legal steps associated with adopting and/or fostering children.

‍

IRS Publishes 2025 Annual Retirement Plan Maximums

• The 401(k) annual contribution limit increased from $23,000 to $23,500 in 2025.
• The catch-up contribution limit stayed unchanged at $7,500 for participants aged 50 and over.
• The SECURE Act 2.0 also instituted a new type of catch-up contribution, which enables participating people (age 60 to 63) to contribute up to $11,250 annually.

You can read more here. 

‍

IRS Publishes 2025 Annual Benefit Maximums

• The HFSA contribution max is $3,300 (maximum carryover is $650 for HFSAs with carryover features).
• The QSEHRA max for total reimbursements is $6,350 for single coverage and $12,800 for family coverage.
• The max employee tax credit for adoption assistance is $17,280, with additional conditions depending on employee salary range. 
• The monthly parking and mass transit benefit max is $325. 

‍

You can find the complete IRS 2025 benefit contribution limit list here.

‍

Minimum Wage Increases for Federal Contractors

As of January 1, 2025, the minimum wage for work conducted in association with federal contracts covered by Executive Order 13658 is $13.30 ($9.30 for tipped employees), while the minimum wage paid for work conducted in association with federal contracts covered by Executive Order 14026 is $17.75 per hour for both tipped and non-tipped employees.

‍

Additional guidance about which kinds of contracts are covered by which executive order can be found here. 

‍

ERISA Guidance for Long-Term Part-Time Employees

You can find guidance for ERISA 403(b) plan eligibility requirements for long-term, part-time employees according to the updated standards from the Secure ACT 2.0 here.

Editor's Note: This report is based on survey data from January 2025 that was published in February 2025. This is the most recent data available. (Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics)

‍

US employers added 143 thousand jobs last month, which fell a bit short from the almost 170 thousand that economists were forecasting.

‍

At the same time, the national unemployment rate average ticked down by one-tenth of a point to 4% for the first time since May of 2024.

‍

Beyond the slight movement in unemployment rate and increase in payroll figures, however, the labor market showed little movement whatsoever, with no significant change in labor force participation rate (62.6%) or in the number of people working part-time but who want full-time work (4.5 million). 

‍

There was similarly little movement among the long-term unemployed (1.4 million) or the number of people who want a job but haven’t actively looked for one in the last 4 weeks (5.5 million) - only a relatively small portion of which had actively sought work in the last year (1.6 million) - all of which held steady from month to month.

‍

Although the fewer than 150 thousand net jobs added across the US last month is down substantially from the more than 250 thousand net jobs recorded the month before, there were several industries that performed in line with expectations.

‍

The healthcare industry reported the largest net increase in jobs last month with plus 44 thousand, which is slightly below the 55 thousand healthcare jobs averaged each month in 2024.

‍

The retail industry had the next largest net job increase with plus 34 thousand, followed by government jobs at plus 32 thousand, then the social assistance industry, which grew by 22 thousand payroll entries.

‍

Mining was the only industry that saw a net job loss over the month (minus 8,000), while the remainder of industries remained essentially unchanged, including the construction industry, the manufacturing industry, the wholesale trade, the information industry, the transportation and warehousing industry, the leisure and hospitality industry, the professional and business services industry, and the financial activities industry.

‍

Average hourly pay rose by about 17 cents to $35.87 per hour (an increase of 0.5%), while the average workweek length fell slightly to 34.1 hours per week. 

‍

Mployer’s Take

This BLS report contains the final batch of data collected under the Biden administration, which saw the US unemployment rate drop by 2.2% under its watch, down from 6.2% in February of 2021 to 4% as of January 2025.

‍

This report also marks the 49th consecutive month of net job gains, which is the second longest streak of positive job growth since these numbers have been tracked. 

‍

In fact, the only longer period of consecutive job growth in recorded US history occurred between October of 2010 and February of 2020, just as the pandemic was ramping up in the US, and were it not for the COVID employment dip which was accompanied by a historically quick recovery, the current ongoing streak of job growth and the last would be almost 4 times longer than the next longest streak.

‍

Given that the 5th longest streak is 44 consecutive months of job growth, even getting to 40 consecutive months of growth is historically noteworthy and hitting 50 or more months of job growth has only happened once before, about 10 years ago. If the US maintains its current trajectory and achieves positive job growth again next month, that will be the second occurrence ever of more than 50 consecutive months of job growth, and those streaks have essentially occurred back to back.

‍

All that to say, while the current job growth streak is not exactly unprecedented, it's pretty close and the streak does become more of an outlier with each passing month.

‍

With the transfer of power comes questions about how trade agreement negotiations and immigration policy orders will ultimately play out, for example, and those outcomes will affect labor and employment issues both directly and indirectly.

‍

While those outcomes remain to be seen, however, the uncertainty itself can in many cases have a negative drag on economic views, perhaps as evidenced in the notable downturn in consumer sentiment of late, but it’s likely that sentiment will rise or fall with economic performance, and those numbers will start coming in next month.

‍

Check out the Mployer blog here.