|
APPLIES TO All Employers |
EFFECTIVE May 21, 2018 |
QUESTIONS? Contact HR On-Call |
At long last, the U.S. Supreme Court finally issued its ruling on whether or not class action waivers in arbitration agreements violate the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”) – short answer, they don’t.
|
APPLIES TO All Employers with AL, AZ, CA, HI, ID, OR, MT, NV, and WA Employees |
EFFECTIVE April 9, 2018 |
QUESTIONS? Contact HR On-Call |
In April 2017, the Ninth Circuit previously confirmed that employers could consider an individual’s prior salary history when justifying a wage differential. Now, a year later, the circuit court has reversed its own decision, stating that prior salary history cannot be used to justify pay disparities prohibited by the federal Equal Pay Act.
|
APPLIES TO All Employers |
EFFECTIVE April 6 and 12, 2018 |
QUESTIONS? Contact HR On-Call |
April has been a busy month for the U.S. Department of Labor (“DOL”). The Wage and Hour Division issued a number of opinion letters, a bulletin, and a revised fact sheet addressing different employee pay practices, such as tip credits, travel time, and rest periods. Employers should review the different letters for applicability to their workforce.
|
APPLIES TO All Employers with CA Employees |
EFFECTIVE April 30, 2018 |
QUESTIONS? Contact HR On-Call |
In Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court (Lee), the California Supreme Court created a new test for determining whether a worker is an employee or independent contractor for purposes of wage and hour claims, making it one of the strictest standards in the country. A class action was filed against a delivery service employer who converted its employee drivers to independent contractors in 2004 for economic reasons. The class alleged, in part, that they were misclassified and Dynamex failed to pay overtime, provide itemized wage statements, and reimburse business expenses.
|
APPLIES TO Employers with 5 or more San Francisco Employees |
EFFECTIVE October 1, 2018 |
QUESTIONS? Contact HR On-Call |
San Francisco has amended its Fair Chance Ordinance for restrictions on employee criminal history inquiries. Effective October 1, 2018, the Fair Chance Ordinance will now apply to employers with 5 or more employees, rather than the currently stated 20 or more employees. Additionally, employers will be prohibited from making pre-employment conviction history inquiries until after a conditional offer of employment, to bring the Ordinance in line with current California requirements.
Of particular note, employers will be prohibited from inquiring about or requiring disclosure of convictions of decriminalized behavior, including convictions for the non-commercial use and cultivation of marijuana, regardless of when they occurred. California employers are already prohibited from inquiring about certain non-felony marijuana convictions that are more than two years old. This departure from state requirements will mean that employers need to carefully reexamine background check procedures to ensure compliance with the local Ordinance.
Disclaimer: This document is designed to provide general information and guidance concerning employment-related issues. It is presented with the understanding that ManagEase is not engaged in rendering any legal opinions. If a legal opinion is needed, please contact the services of your own legal adviser.
© 2018 ManagEase
|
APPLIES TO Certain Employers with Employees in CO, ID, UT |
EFFECTIVE Varies; See Below |
QUESTIONS? Contact HR On-Call |
Colorado
On April 2, 2018, the Colorado governor signed SB 18-082, which amended state law related to physician noncompete agreements, allowing physicians to disclose their continuing practice and contact information to a patient with a rare disorder whom they have been providing treatment. This amendment is meant to avoid disruptions in treatment for patients with rare disorders. Review the recent bill here.
|
APPLIES TO All Employers with LA Employees |
EFFECTIVE March 15, 2018 |
QUESTIONS? Contact HR On-Call |
In Brown v. The Blood Center, the Louisiana Court of Appeal recently stated that the standard for pregnancy disability under the state’s Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) does not apply to the definition of disability under the Employment Discrimination Law (EDL), because of limiting language in the PDA. The EDL states that a disability includes a physical impairment that limits one or more major life activities, while the PDA states that pregnancy or related conditions are treated as any other temporary disability.
There, a pregnant employee became ill and abandoned her post without first notifying her supervisor. Two hours later, she called her supervisor to tell him what happened. The employer had a policy of termination for post abandonment and terminated the employee. She claimed that she was discriminated against for a pregnancy disability, but only claimed she was having a difficult pregnancy. Because the pregnancy disability definition did not apply to the EDL, the court stated, in part, the employee did not demonstrate that she suffered from an applicable disability.
Disclaimer: This document is designed to provide general information and guidance concerning employment-related issues. It is presented with the understanding that ManagEase is not engaged in rendering any legal opinions. If a legal opinion is needed, please contact the services of your own legal adviser.
© 2018 ManagEase
|
APPLIES TO All Employers of MA Employees |
EFFECTIVE October 13, 2018 |
QUESTIONS? Contact HR On-Call |
The Governor recently signed SB 2371 amending the Criminal Offender Record Information Reform Act to increase restrictions on employee criminal history inquiries. Specifically, employers cannot inquire into convictions for misdemeanors where the date of conviction occurred three or more years (down from the current five year limitation) from the date of the employment application, unless there was an intervening conviction. Additionally, employers may not inquire about criminal records that have been sealed or expunged.
Importantly, employers who seek information about prior arrests or convictions of applicants must include the following statement on employment applications:
“An applicant for employment with a record expunged pursuant to section 100F, section 100G, section 100H or section 100K of chapter 276 of the General Laws may answer ‘no record’ with respect to an inquiry herein relative to prior arrests, criminal court appearances or convictions. An applicant for employment with a record expunged pursuant to section 100F, section 100G, section 100H or section 100K of chapter 276 of the General Laws may answer ‘no record’ to an inquiry herein relative to prior arrests, criminal court appearances, juvenile court appearances, adjudications or convictions.”
Disclaimer: This document is designed to provide general information and guidance concerning employment-related issues. It is presented with the understanding that ManagEase is not engaged in rendering any legal opinions. If a legal opinion is needed, please contact the services of your own legal adviser.
© 2018 ManagEase
|
APPLIES TO All Employers with NJ Employees |
EFFECTIVE July 1, 2018 |
QUESTIONS? Contact HR On-Call |
New Jersey recently enacted stronger protections to its equal pay laws. Currently, employers are prohibited from discrimination in method or payment of wages based on sex. Effective July 1, 2018, this protection will soon apply to anyone in a protected class. The Diane B. Allen Equal Pay Act prohibits paying any member of a protected class “at a rate of compensation, including benefits, which is less than the rate paid … to employees who are not members of the protected class for substantially similar work when viewed as a composite of skill, effort and responsibility.”
|
APPLIES TO All Employers with NJ Employees |
EFFECTIVE October 29, 2018 |
QUESTIONS? Contact HR On-Call |
On May 2, 2018, New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy signed AB 1827 into law, making New Jersey the 10th state in the nation to require paid sick leave (“PSL”) for all employees. The bill will replace local paid sick leave ordinances and create uniform paid sick leave requirements for employers across New Jersey.