News (All)

CMM Releases Whitepaper on Economic Development in the LI-IPH

Posted: June 17th, 2021

Over the past five years, CMM Managing Partner Joe Campolo, Chairman of HIA-LI’s Long Island Innovation Park at Hauppauge (LI-IPH) Task Force, has successfully spearheaded efforts to quantify the economic impact of the LI-IPH and attract critical investment in the Park. Recognizing that the Park is the anchor of Long Island’s tradable economy, Campolo has led the way in creating bipartisan and public-private partnerships to move this critical economic development project forward. Joined by CMM Director of Communications Lauren Kanter-Lawrence and Communications Coordinator Ilona Kaydanov, Campolo released a whitepaper earlier this month focusing on the economic impact of the Park on Long Island and addressing the challenges that lie ahead.  Below, read Campolo’s recent article in the HIA-LI Reporter discussing this work and new directions for the Task Force.

LI-IPH Spotlight: Expanding Our Reach and Getting Things Done

The phrase “we’re all in this together” has become a cliché throughout the pandemic, popping up everywhere from national commercials to your dry cleaner’s storefront. But to me, nowhere has this sentiment been more true than to describe the incredible success of the Long Island Innovation Park at Hauppauge (LI-IPH) Task Force, which I am privileged to chair. The collective efforts – public/private and bipartisan – of our diverse Task Force membership exemplify how Long Island gets things done.

WHITEPAPER: Recognizing the critical importance of the LI-IPH’s success – and the role that housing plays in attracting highly educated professionals to work there – the Town of Smithtown amended their zoning code in August 2020. The change permits developers to apply for a special exception on 13 parcels in the Park for mixed-use buildings that incorporate ground-floor retail or restaurants with upstairs apartments and offices. However, the Hauppauge School District has commenced an Article 78 proceeding challenging the zoning change, and other critics oppose the change based on wastewater concerns.

To combat misinformation, address concerns, and make the case for why we have no choice but to ensure the Park’s success, the Task Force rolled up its sleeves to create a detailed whitepaper, “Long Island Innovation Park at Hauppauge: Securing Long Island’s Future.” The whitepaper is the culmination of significant research, studies, input from stakeholders, and efforts to quantify the tremendous economic impact of the Park, and I am confident that this work will help garner the support that is so critical to the Park’s success.

GROWING THE TASK FORCE: We are, in fact, all in this together – so as Long Island’s premier business advocacy group, the HIA-LI is expanding the Task Force (and our collective efforts) to promote economic development initiatives of all shapes and sizes.

  • The LI-IPH Task Force will continue advocating for the Park and attracting the investment and development needed to ensure Long Island’s future economic success.
  • MacArthur Airport will become a major focus as we work with the Town of Islip to attract new carriers and take advantage of pent-up demand from travelers.
  • We will unpack the gem that is the Town of Islip Foreign Trade Zone, which offers an ideal environment for companies engaged in global trade.
  • Innovation is thriving at Brookhaven National Lab, where the Electron-Ion Collider is being built to look inside the atomic nucleus. The EIC will facilitate the study of the strong nuclear force – and what scientists learn could power the technologies of tomorrow.

As we emerge from the pandemic, the HIA-LI is not looking to resume the status quo. Our resolve to push boundaries and make things happen on Long Island is stronger than ever.

Campolo Joins Long Island MacArthur Airport Advisory Board

Posted: June 16th, 2021

Joe Campolo, Managing Partner of Campolo, Middleton & McCormick, LLP and recognized business leader, has joined the Long Island MacArthur Airport Advisory Board at the invitation of Town of Islip Supervisor Angie Carpenter. Designated an Official Metro Airport by the FAA, MacArthur is one of the top 110 airports in the country and is a critical component of the Ronkonkoma Hub project as well as the greater Long Island economy.

Campolo is Managing Partner of Campolo, Middleton & McCormick, LLP, a premier law firm recently recognized by Forbes as a Top Corporate Law Firm in America. The firm’s headquarters sits at the entrance to MacArthur Airport, giving Campolo a unique perspective on the airport’s opportunities and challenges.

In addition to running his own business and advising the who’s-who of Long Island about theirs, Campolo has kept an unyielding focus on growing the economy and investing in the community. His insight and no-fear attitude have led to some of the most significant economic initiatives on Long Island today, including the renaming, reinvestment, and rezoning of the Long Island Innovation Park at Hauppauge (LI-IPH). This experience caught the attention of Supervisor Carpenter, with whom Campolo has worked on the HIA-LI’s LI-IPH Task Force.

“I’m delighted to have Joe on the Airport Advisory Board,” Supervisor Carpenter said. “His business sense, his experience moving economic development projects forward, and his focus on making our beloved Long Island as strong as it can be all make him a great asset.”

With travel opening up from its pandemic slowdown, Campolo is focused on seizing this opportunity to promote the airport for more business travel, as well as assisting the Town with their quest to bring in new carriers. “As we’ve learned from the important work we have been able to accomplish so far with the LI-IPH Task Force, a common element needed for robust economic development in a geographic area is access to transportation hubs,” said Campolo. “Long Island MacArthur Airport is a critical part of Long Island’s economy and ecosystem and I look forward to helping Supervisor Carpenter and the Town of Islip enhance the vitality of this asset.”

EEOC Says Employers Can Mandate the COVID-19 Vaccine

Posted: June 11th, 2021

By Christine Malafi

As of this writing, more than 300 million COVID-19 vaccines have been administered in the United States, vaccinating about half of the population according to the CDC. 52.4% of people are fully vaccinated and 61.7% have received at least one dose. As vaccination efforts continue, more businesses are reopening, and more employers are returning to an in-person model of working. When the first vaccines were administered in December 2020, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued guidance regarding employers’ obligations for mandatory COVID-19 vaccines. On May 28, 2021, the EEOC issued new guidance.

Here, we provide a refresher course on the earlier guidance, and a look at the new guidance.

Vaccine Mandates

The December EEOC guidance provided that employers can require that employees get vaccinated as a condition of returning to work if their vaccination policies comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (“GINA”), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and other workplace laws. This information still holds true.

The May 28 EEOC guidance now expressly allows employers to require all employees physically entering the workplace to be vaccinated. However, employers are still required to provide reasonable accommodations to employees due to medical disability or religious beliefs as long as the accommodations do not pose an “undue hardship” on the employer. Examples of reasonable accommodations include wearing a face mask at work, social distancing from other employees, or working from home. Read more about reasonable accommodation and the definition of “undue hardship” in our earlier article here.

On August 23, the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine was granted full approval by the Food and Drug Administration for individuals 16 years of age and over (while for individuals 12-15 years of age the Pfizer vaccine is still under emergency use authorization). Following the full FDA approval, many employers and entities are now mandating the COVID-19 vaccine for their personnel. For instance, the Pentagon has mandated that the U.S. military receive the vaccine, and many universities, the State University of New York (SUNY) system among them, are mandating the same for their students.

These recent COVID-19 vaccine mandates demonstrates that the FDA’s full approval of the Pfizer vaccine for individuals 16 and over could (and is already) influencing employers, employees, and vaccine mandates. With the FDA’s review of the Moderna and Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccines on the horizon (as Moderna has applied for full approval already), new guidelines on mandatory vaccines will start to come out as the vaccines move from emergency authorization to full approval by the FDA.

Vaccine Reporting

The updated May EEOC guidance clarifies that employers are legally allowed to request documentation of an employee’s vaccination status; however, this documentation is considered medical information, so it must be kept confidential. And, while an employer asking about vaccine status is not covered under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, it is a violation for employers to ask employees to disclose additional health information such as specific medical reasons or religious beliefs that prohibit their vaccination.

Vaccine Incentives

Under the new May EEOC guidance, employers may offer incentives to employees for receiving the COVID-19 vaccine and showing documentation. Employers should be careful when considering incentives so that their actions are not viewed as coercive and that incentives do not pressure employees to reveal protected medical information.

As new developments related to vaccination mandates occur, the EEOC will provide additional updates, which we will continue to report on as such guidance comes out.

If you are an employer or employee with any questions regarding a mandate of the COVID-19 vaccine, reporting, and incentives based on the new EEOC guidance, please contact us.


Add “No” to Your Negotiation Toolkit

Posted: June 7th, 2021

By: Joe Campolo, Esq. email

Tags:

Imagine you want to sell life insurance to a client. As part of your pitch, you might say, “Don’t you want to make sure your loved ones are left with some financial peace of mind?” The client will probably answer, “Yes, of course.” With this response, the client is probably thinking that they know they need to put life insurance on their radar, but still aren’t ready to focus on it.

Now, what if you said this instead: “Is it a good idea to leave your loved ones with zero financial security if anything were to happen to you?” Suddenly, the client is horrified and responds with, “No, of course not!” Your question prompts them to think of horrible scenarios in which they are gone, and their loved ones have zero financial security. The client’s “no” response evoked more thought and emotion than the “yes” one. You are able to capture the client’s interest in the insurance you provide.

While “no” seems like it has a negative connotation and should be avoided during negotiation, the opposite is often true. The simple word “no” holds a great deal of power, and when utilized correctly, can be used to strategically maneuver your negotiation to a spot where you hold the control. Whether you’re talking about a critical business deal, trying to avoid litigation, or even negotiating with your business partner or a client, the goal is to change your mindset so that that “no” becomes a cue to break out different negotiation tools, rather than end the negotiation. Read on to find out three useful strategies to wield the answer “no” in your negotiation.

1. Ask “No” Questions

Sometimes people don’t like to say “yes” at first because it involves too much commitment. For example, if you get an email from a colleague asking you to attend a function, accepting the invitation involves a lot of steps. First you need to check your calendar. Then you want to find out how much it costs and see if you want to commit. Is the location far or annoying to get to? What if you get really busy at work that day? Will you be dreading the event for weeks to come? It’s far easier just to say no. Now, say you get an email asking, “Are you against attending the function next week?” Suddenly, you’re not being asked to commit to anything at all. It’s easy to respond now and say, “No, I’m not against it.”

Some more “no” questions include asking, “Do you disagree with this?” rather than “Do you agree with this?” and asking, “Is this a ridiculous idea?” rather than, “Is this a good idea?”  By deliberately asking questions that seek a “no” reply, you’re setting the conversation up to keep going with further communication.

Another example is if two business partners are negotiating the breakup of their business. Imagine you’re one of the partners and you receive this email: “Are you willing to consider this option?” and the partner then proceeds to discuss that option. You’re going to need some time to think about it before replying. However, if you received a question like this: “Are you opposed to considering this option?” then it would be easy to reply quickly that day to say “No, I’m not opposed to potentially discussing it.” This way, you’ve given no commitment with your reply to consider the option – but the conversation can continue.

2. Hint at an Exaggerated Worst-Case Scenario

This strategy still involves asking a question and hoping for a “no,” but it involves making your counterpart think about the worst thing that can happen. For example, when you ask permission to do something hoping for a “yes” you might say: “Can I get that project to you tomorrow instead of today please?” This might get you a stern lecture on time management and deadlines.

However, what if you asked, “Would it be absolutely detrimental to the company if I handed in the project tomorrow?” Of course, with this question, you want them to say “no.” With the “no” question, you force your counterpart to think: Would it actually be detrimental for the company if I don’t get the project until tomorrow? I mean, not really…

So now, all because you asked a “no” question that forced the other person to think about the exaggerated consequences of what you’re asking – you get to hand in your project a day later.

3. “No” as a Correction

This strategy involves saying something that you think is false to confirm the truth with a “no” to gather information. For example, if a customer wants to negotiate their rate and you want to find out if they’ve reached out to other competitors, you could say, “You must have found someone else who says they can provide this service at a better rate.” Of course, you don’t want them to say “yes” here – you’re hoping for the “no” response as a correction to your false claim. If they respond with “no,” then you can be sure you’re still in the running, but there’s some underlying concern about the product or service you are providing. (And if they say yes, well, that’s helpful information too.)

After hearing the “no” correction following a false claim, you can gather information through active listening skills to assuage their fears and gain a new client (read more about how to do this here.) By using this strategy, the “no” can help you ascertain why the customer wanted to negotiate their rate in the first place.

Think of a negotiation like a puzzle you need to solve that when put together, reveals a message. Questions that lead to “yes” answers right away can perhaps help you solve the puzzle quickly and easily; however, the message on the completed puzzle will be too zoomed in. You won’t be able to read it. “No” answers, however, lead to a completed puzzle that captures the whole message.

So, the next time you’re in a negotiation, you don’t have to dread hearing the answer “no.” In fact, you can purposefully seek the answer out using the strategies above to shake things up in a negotiation – giving you the edge you need to succeed.

Read more about using “no” in negotiation in former FBI top hostage negotiator Chris Voss’s book, Never Split the Difference: Negotiating As If Your Life Depended on It (HarperCollins 2016).

CMM Closes Sale of Medical Gas Company

Posted: May 26th, 2021

Tags:

Properly handling due diligence can be daunting no matter what the size and scope of an M&A deal, but many attorneys simply walk away when a deal involves highly technical industries with complex technology and a maze of regulations. Not so with Campolo, Middleton & McCormick’s M&A team, which recently closed a deal for a long-time client specializing in the medical gas industry.

Over several decades, our clients had built their company into a leader in the highly specialized medical gas service industry. The company offers equipment sales as well as the testing and installation of medical gas systems with a staff of credentialed technicians. Allowing Long Islanders to breathe easier, the company ensures safety and quality of life-saving safety systems. The company was sold to a leading medical gas supplier that offers access to its products and services globally.

CMM’s team was led by Vincent Costa with invaluable support from paralegal Katharine Campolo. Having represented the seller over many years in various corporate matters, coupled with the team’s M&A experience, CMM was well suited to ensure a successful transaction. Protegrity Advisors, a Mergers and Acquisitions firm on Long Island, also advised the sellers on the deal.

Learn more about our Mergers & Acquisitions practice and call us at (631) 738-9100 for guidance on your next sale, purchase, or restructuring.

CMM Closes Multimillion-Dollar M&A Deal for Long Island Aerospace Business

Posted: May 17th, 2021

Tags:

Campolo, Middleton & McCormick’s M&A team continues its busy spring – closing another multimillion-dollar deal in a transaction that will keep business booming on Long Island.

The firm represented a multi-generation family-owned aerospace business in the sale of substantially all its business assets to a Connecticut-based private equity firm. Our client, the supplier of a diverse range of aerospace structural components and assemblies, flight safety assemblies, and flight critical parts, provides support to various private and military programs. These include the Lunar Space Program, Boeing’s 777 and 767 programs, as well as the U.S. Military’s V22 Osprey and CH-47 Chinook programs.

The family-owned business is located in the Long Island Innovation Park at Hauppauge (LI-IPH), which is recognized as the anchor of Long Island’s tradable economy, bringing critical new dollars into a region. In a display of long-lasting and continuous growth for Long Island, the deal includes the buyer’s commitment to keep the business in the Long Island community through the long-term lease of the client’s buildings located in the center of the LI-IPH.

While the deal faced several complications, CMM’s corporate team including Don Rassiger, Vincent Costa, and paralegal Katharine Campolo, were able to push through and close the transaction. As a champion for the Long Island business community, CMM takes pride in negotiating and closing complex transactions that secure long-term growth benefiting both our clients and Long Island as a whole.

Learn more about our Mergers & Acquisitions practice here and contact us for guidance on your next sale, purchase, or restructuring.

Biden Administration Rescinds Trump Era Independent Contractor Rule

Posted: May 14th, 2021

Tags:

Whether a worker is classified as an employee or independent contractor is not just legal jargon: the distinction has real implications for employees and employers alike. Under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), employees are entitled to a guaranteed minimum wage, overtime pay, unemployment insurance benefits, and workers compensation. Independent contractors, however, are not entitled to these same benefits, nor are they eligible to join unions or entitled to coverage under worker safety protection regulations. In addition, employers are not responsible for an independent contractor’s benefits or employment taxes. So how does an employer appropriately classify workers?

Trump Rule

In January 2021, with two weeks left before a new administration would be sworn in, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) issued a “final rule” changing the standard distinguishing employees or independent contractors under the FLSA. However, on May 6, 2021 the DOL withdrew the “Trump-era test,” also known as the “Independent Contractor Rule,” from going into effect as planned. Under that standard, there would have been only two core factors for determining employee status under the FLSA, both of which narrowed the facts and considerations included in the analysis (and, according to the Department, favored the employer). The DOL under President Biden has announced that the Trump rule was inconsistent with the FLSA and would have had a disruptive effect on workers and businesses alike.

Moving Forward

While the “Trump rule” is now withdrawn, the DOL has not issued a new rule in its place. This means that the previous guidance from the DOL using the economic realities test consisting of a six-factor balancing test, based on Supreme Court precedent, will still be used to determine a worker’s classification. The six factors include (1) the nature and degree of the potential employer’s control; (2) the permanency of the worker’s relationship with the potential employer; (3) the amount of the worker’s investment in facilities, equipment, or helpers; (4) the amount of skill, initiative, judgment, or foresight required for the worker’s services; (5) the worker’s opportunities for profit or loss; and (6) the extent of integration of the worker’s services into the potential employer’s business. Read additional information about these factors, as well as New York State guidance, here.

“ABC” Test

While the DOL has not issued a new rule at this time, the Biden administration has expressed support for regulatory and legislative action that would expand the type of workers that are considered employees as opposed to independent contractors. Similar to California’s independent contractor rule, the Biden administration has outlined a federal independent contractor standard called an “ABC” test that the DOL may choose to adopt.

The standard begins with the presumption that the worker is an employee and then goes on to test that presumption under three factors:

  • whether the worker is free from the employer’s control over performance of the work;
  • whether the work is outside of the hiring party’s line of business, and
  • whether the worker is engaged in an independent trade.

All three factors must be met to rebut the presumption and to classify the worker as an independent contractor.

While the three factors considered under Biden’s ABC test are already included in the current analysis, the ABC test is stricter in that it requires all three to be met as opposed to the longstanding “economic realities” approach and judged based on a totality of the circumstances. The ABC test was adopted by the House of Representatives in March via the “Protecting the Right to Organize Act” (PRO), but there is no binding authority of a final rule.

Regardless of whether the new standard becomes legal authority, it is clear the current administration is pushing for a more worker-friendly approach to the independent contractor definition. Whether you are a worker seeking to ensure you receive the benefits to which you are entitled, or an employer needing clarification on how to properly classify workers, please contact us for guidance.

The information contained in this article is provided for informational purposes only and is not and should not be construed as legal advice on any subject matter. The firm provides legal advice and other services only to persons or entities with which it has established an attorney-client relationship.