Louisiana: Nondisclosure Clauses for Sexual Harassment and Hostile Work Environment Claims Prohibited

APPLIES TO

All Employers with Employees in LA

EFFECTIVE

August 1, 2024

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

Quick Look

  • HB 161 invalidates any employer-required nondisclosure clause agreed to prior to a workplace misconduct dispute involving a hostile work environment or sexual harassment claim.
  • The bill covers any agreement between an employee and employer that prevents, or has the effect of preventing, an employee from disclosing or discussing a hostile work environment, allegations of a hostile work environment, sexual harassment, or allegations of sexual harassment.

Discussion

Effective August 1, 2024, HB 161 invalidates any employer-required nondisclosure clause agreed to prior to a workplace misconduct dispute involving a hostile work environment or sexual harassment claim. The bill defines “hostile work environment” as conditions where harassment rises to the level that the harassment alters the ability of an employee to perform the employee’s duties. “Sexual harassment” is defined as unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal, physical, or inappropriate conduct of a sexual nature when the conduct explicitly or implicitly affects an individual’s employment, unreasonably interferes with an individual’s work performance, or creates an intimidating or offensive work environment.

 

The definition of a nondisclosure clause is equally broad. It covers any agreement between an employee and employer that prevents, or has the effect of preventing, an employee from disclosing or discussing a hostile work environment, allegations of a hostile work environment, sexual harassment, or allegations of sexual harassment. Individuals can still enter into a confidential settlement agreement relating to a hostile work environment or sexual harassment provided that the agreement is entered into after a report of hostility or harassment is filed or a hostile work environment dispute or sexual harassment dispute has occurred.

 

The bill is also notable for what it does not include. It does not address the validity of such clauses in the event a claim is asserted after termination of employment. It also does not address whether it applies to agreements entered into after termination like severance agreements. Employers should review their existing agreements with legal counsel to determine whether they are enforceable and make changes to future agreements as necessary.

 

Action Items

  1. Review the bill here.
  2. Review and update confidentiality clauses in all employment agreements with legal counsel.
  3. Review and update harassment and discrimination policies.

 


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. © 2024 ManagEase

Massachusetts: Pay Transparency Law Enacted

APPLIES TO

Employers with 25+ Employees in MA

EFFECTIVE

July 31, 2025

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

Quick Look

  • HB 4890 requires any employer with 25 or more employees within Massachusetts to disclose the pay range for any job posting.
  • There is also a requirement to provide the same information to employees who are offered internal promotions or transfers to positions with different job duties.
  • Employers that are subject to federal Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) disclosures are now required to also provide the EEO data as a wage data report to the Massachusetts Executive Office of Labor and Workforce Development.

Discussion

Effective July 31, 2025, HB 4890 requires any employer with 25 or more employees within Massachusetts to disclose the pay range for any job posting. The bill includes many of the same requirements as other states that have enacted pay transparency laws. A pay range is defined as the annual salary range or hourly wage range that the employer reasonably and in good faith expects to pay for the position at the time of posting. A job posting is any advertisement or job posting intended to recruit job applicants for a particular and specific employment position, whether directly or through a third party. There is also a requirement to provide the same information to employees who are offered internal promotions or transfers to positions with different job duties.

 

Employers that are subject to federal Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) disclosures are now required to also provide the EEO data as a wage data report to the Massachusetts Executive Office of Labor and Workforce Development. The Secretary of State’s office may establish a web portal, sample email submission, or paper form to facilitate the submission of the wage data reports. The submitted wage data reports will not be considered public records.

 

Employers are prohibited from retaliating against employees for complaints or seeking to enforce their rights under the law. The state Attorney General is tasked with enforcing the law and can obtain injunctive or declaratory relief. Violations will receive a warning for the first offense, a fine of no more than $500 for the second offense, and a fine of not more than $1,000 for the third offense. There is no private right of action for individuals.

 

Action Items

  1. Review the bill here.
  2. Update hiring procedures and job postings for required information.
  3. Prepare to report EEO data, if applicable.
  4. Have appropriate personnel trained on the requirements.

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. © 2024 ManagEase

Michigan: 2018 Wage Act and Earned Sick Time Act Reinstated in 2025

APPLIES TO

All Employers with Employees in MI

EFFECTIVE

February 21, 2025

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

Quick Look

  • The state legislature acted unconstitutionally when it adopted voter initiatives and later amended them in the same legislative session.
  • The original 2018 version of the Earned Sick Time Act will go into effect February 21, 2025.
  • The original 2018 version of the Wage Act will have the minimum wage increases updated by the state treasurer by November 1, 2024, and will also go into effect February 21, 2025.

Discussion

On July 31, 2024, in Mothering Justice v. Attorney General, the Michigan Supreme Court reinstated the original versions of the 2018 Wage Act and Earned Sick Time Act (ESTA), replacing the current Paid Medical Leave Act (PMLA). The Wage Act and ESTA were passed in 2018, but have been the subject of ongoing litigation ever since. The Court said that the legislature’s decision to adopt voter initiatives and then later amend them in the same legislative session violated the people’s constitutionally guaranteed right to propose and enact laws through the initiative process.  Ultimately, the Court reinstated the original versions of 2018 PA 337 and 2018 PA 338.

 

The Court also applied the original 205-day delay between the laws’ enactment and their effective dates, a presumed transition period for employers, to the date of this ruling. This means that the Wage Act and ESTA will not be effective until February 21, 2025, giving employers time to make the adjustment. Importantly, because the legislature was deemed at fault, the Court said that employers cannot be held liable for their reasonable reliance upon the state government’s assurances that the Amended Wage Act and the Amended Earned Sick Time Act were good law.

 

Because the Wage Act implemented minimum wage increases in the past, the Court sought to use the same level increases in the future but adjusted for inflation. As a result, the state treasurer must use the July 31, 2024 opinion publication date to calculate the inflation-adjusted rates for the minimum hourly wage requirements provided in the Wage Act. The treasurer has until November 1st to announce the adjusted rates. The Wage Act’s timeline for years 2019 to 2022 will be treated the same for years 2025 to 2028.

 

The original version of the ESTA is significantly different from the PMLA. Here are key notable differences.

 

  PMLA ESTA
Eligibility Employees: Non-exempt employees; part-time employees who worked 25 hours or more per week the preceding calendar year.

Employers: Employers with 50 or more employees.

All employees and all private employers are subject to the ESTA
Leave Amounts Accrual Rate: One hour for every 35 hours worked.

Cap: Accrual can be capped at one hour per week and 40 hours in a benefit year.

Carryover: Employers can cap carryover at 40 hours per year or avoid carryover by granting 40 hours at the beginning of each benefit year.

Accrual Rate: One hour per 30 hours worked.

Cap: No annual or overall cap currently indicated.

Carryover: All accrued leave carries over from year to year.

Usage Employers can cap usage at 40 hours per benefit year. 1-9 Employees: Employees may use up to 40 hours per year, with the remaining 32 hours available as unpaid time off.

10+ Employees: Employees may use up to 72 hours per year.

Reasons for Leave (1) Mental or physical injury or illness of employee or family member; (2) victim of domestic violence or sexual assault; (3) closure of business or school due to public health emergency (1) Mental or physical injury or illness of employee or family member; (2) victim of domestic violence or sexual assault; (3) attend specified school or child care meetings; (4) closure of business or school due to public health emergency

 

Action Items

  1. Review the Court’s ruling here.
  2. Prepare for implementation of the new paid sick leave requirements, including having employee handbooks, policies, and payroll practices updated.
  3. Have managers trained on paid sick leave use and notice requirements.
  4. Review payroll procedures and labor budgeting for increased minimum wage.

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. © 2024 ManagEase

Minnesota: Claims for Negligent Selection of Independent Contractors

APPLIES TO

Companies Engaging Independent Contractors in MN

EFFECTIVE

July 10, 2024

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

Quick Look

  • The Minnesota Supreme Court recognized a claim for negligent selection of an independent contractor, finding that a claimant must show that the principal (1) breached their duty to exercise reasonable care in selecting a competent and careful contractor, and (2) that this breach of duty caused the claimant’s physical harm.

Discussion

In Alonzo v. Menholt, the Minnesota Supreme Court recognized a new claim for negligent selection of an independent contractor. As a result, companies operating in the state of Minnesota may be held responsible for inadequately screening their independent contractors or their employees prior to engagement.

 

In this case, two drivers hauling sugar beets crashed into each other on a rural Minnesota road.  One of the drivers had a suspended license and several other blemishes on his driving record. The unlicensed driver crossed the road’s centerline and seriously injured the other driver. The injured driver sued the other driver and his employer, Braaten Farms, for his injuries.  Braaten Farms had not interviewed the driver, performed a background check, reviewed his driving record, or done several other pre-employment screens when it hired him.

 

As part of the lawsuit, the injured driver also sued Menholt Farms, for whom Braaten Farms had agreed to provide services as an independent contractor.  Menholt Farms did not perform any background checks on Braaten’s employees, and it did not ask how Braaten “hired or screened the employees who hauled Menholt Farms’s sugar beets.” Because of this, the injured driver alleged that Menholt Farms was negligent in engaging Braaten Farms to provide services as an independent contractor.

 

In deciding the case, the Minnesota Supreme Court said that Minnesota law does recognize a claim for negligent selection of an independent contractor, which requires a showing that the principal (1) breached their duty to exercise reasonable care in selecting a competent and careful contractor, and (2) that this breach of duty caused the claimant’s physical harm. The Court noted that the more dangerous and more specialized the work, the more care an engaging entity must exercise in selecting independent contractors.

 

Action Items

  1. Review and update processes for vetting independent contractors prior to service, including how the independent contractors vet their own employees.
  2. Consult with legal counsel about particular concerns identified with certain independent contractors.

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. © 2024 ManagEase

Rhode Island: Increased Benefits for Temporary Disability and Temporary Caregivers

APPLIES TO

All Employers with Employees in RI

EFFECTIVE

January 1, 2025

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

Quick Look

  • Under the temporary disability insurance program, a dependent’s allowance is increased from $10.00 to $20.00 or seven percent of the individual’s weekly benefit rate.
  • In addition, temporary caregiver benefits are increased to a maximum of 7 weeks in a benefit year.

Discussion

Effective January 1, 2025, HB 7171 increases benefits under Rhode Island’s temporary disability and temporary caregiver programs. Under the temporary disability insurance program, a dependent’s allowance is increased from $10.00 to $20.00 or seven percent of the individual’s weekly benefit rate. The dependent allowance is paid for each of the claimant’s children, including adopted and stepchildren or that individual’s court-appointed wards who, at the beginning of the individual’s benefit year, is under eighteen (18) years of age and who is at that time in fact dependent on that individual.

 

In addition, temporary caregiver benefits are increased to a maximum of 7 weeks in a benefit year. An additional increase occurs on January 1, 2026 to a maximum of 8 weeks in a benefit year. The current maximum is 6 weeks. Temporary caregiver benefits can be taken for the purpose of bonding with a newborn child or a child newly placed for adoption or foster care with the employee or domestic partner; or caring for a child, parent, parent-in-law, grandparent, spouse, or domestic partner, who has a serious health condition. Employers should note that employees cannot file for both temporary caregiver benefits and temporary disability benefits for the same purpose.

 

Action Items

  1. Review the bill here.
  2. Update leave policies to reflect the new requirements.
  3. Have appropriate personnel trained on the requirements.

 


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. © 2024 ManagEase

Tennessee: Additional Requirements for Unemployment Benefits Claimants

APPLIES TO

All Employers with Employees in TN

EFFECTIVE

July 1, 2024

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

Quick Look

  • Amendments to the Tennessee unemployment insurance program redefine “making a reasonable effort to secure work” to a claimant providing detailed information regarding at least four work search activities per week.
  • Employers have the option to report a claimant who fails to appear for a scheduled job interview.

Discussion

Effective July 1, 2024, HB 1060 redefines how an individual claiming unemployment benefits shows that they are able to work, available for work, and making a reasonable effort to secure work under the Tennessee Employment Security Law. Prior law defined “making a reasonable effort to secure work” as the claimant providing detailed information regarding contact with at least three employers per week or must access services at a career center created by the department. The administrator would then verify the information provided. The amendment revises this requirement for defining “making a reasonable effort to secure work” to a claimant providing detailed information regarding at least four work search activities per week. The amendment also provides a list of acceptable work search activities in addition to the administrator verifying the new requirement.

 

The list of disqualifying events now also includes a claimant failing to appear for a scheduled job interview and is non-compliant with the work search requirements of the unemployment insurance program. The claimant is disqualified for benefits for the week the failure occurred. To help with enforcement, employers can report a claimant who fails to appear for a scheduled job interview through the Tennessee Department of Labor & Workforce Development’s portal. Employers are not required to report claimants that violate the unemployment insurance program’s requirements but may opt to.

Action Items

  1. Review the bill here.

 


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. © 2024 ManagEase

August Updates

APPLIES TO

Varies

EFFECTIVE

Varies

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

Dueling Rulings for FTC Non-Compete Ban

The United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas issued a limited preliminary injunction to stay the implementation of the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) ban on non-compete agreements only as to the named plaintiffs in the case and is not nationwide: Ryan, LLC; Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America; Business Roundtable; Texas Association of Business; and Longview Chamber of Commerce. A final order on the case is anticipated by August 30, 2024. Contrasting with this ruling is a decision from the U.S. District Court in Pennsylvania which upheld the FTC’s ban by denying a preliminary injunction against it. This ruling does impact employers nationwide which means employers should immediately review hiring practices in order to comply with the September 4, 2024 effective date of the non-compete ban. Employers should continue to monitor challenges across the country to the proposed ban and consult with legal counsel regarding any current or future non-compete agreements to address compliance with the ban.

 

Third Circuit: NCAA Athletes Can Be Considered Employees

On July 11, 2024, in Johnson v. NCAA, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals issued a long-awaited decision indicating that the economic realities test must be used to determine whether NCAA college athletes are employees under the FLSA. Based on this understanding, the court found that “college athletes may be employees under the FLSA when they (a) perform services for another party, (b) ‘necessarily and primarily for the other party’s benefit,’ (c) under that party’s control or right of control, and (d) in return for ‘express’ or ‘implied’ compensation or ‘in-kind benefits’.” The Third Circuit focused on “the circumstances of the whole activity” and applied a common law agency analysis instead of the district court’s approach of effectively weighing the benefits of the student athletes’ activities to the institution against their benefits to the student athlete. This decision departs from the understanding in other circuits, the Ninth and Seventh, which have found that college athletes are not employees protected by the FLSA. With a distinct circuit split of authority, we may expect this issue to continue on to appeal before the United States Supreme Court.

 

Alabama: Child Labor Laws Amended

Effective June 1, 2024, SB 53 amended Alabama’s child labor law. Under the amendment, 14 and 15-year-olds no longer must obtain the permission of a school official to certify the minor’s satisfactory grades and attendance. Also, the minor’s parents no longer must notify the head administrator, counselor, or instructor of the school the minor attends of the name, address, and phone number of the employer. While these amendments loosen child labor restrictions, employers must still obtain a Child Labor Certificate which limits the hours that minors may work and the occupations in which they work.

 

California: DMV License Suspension Records Remain Accessible

On June 21, 2024, in Doe v. California Dept. of Motor Vehicles, the California court of appeal said that the DMV’s disclosure of the reason for a driver’s alcohol-impaired driving license suspension, when the driver has not been convicted, does not constitute non-conviction arrest information that would otherwise be considered private information. The court said that the DMV’s public driver record does not directly disclose the arrest itself but instead provides the administrative adjudication results from the DMV’s own license suspension process.

 

California: Healthcare Minimum Wage Extended Again

As of June 29, 2024, the California healthcare minimum wage was extended again. AB 159 establishes a new effective date depending on what happens going forward:

  • The minimum wage will go into effect on October 15, 2024 IF the state’s income from July 1 to September 30, 2024, is at least 3% higher than originally budgeted for that time period; OR
  • 15 days after the California Department of Health Care Services notifies the Joint Legislative Budget Committee that it has initiated the data retrieval necessary for Medi-Cal increases; OR
  • As of January 1, 2025, if neither of the other two conditions are met.

 

California: CFRA Support for Small Businesses Bolstered

As of July 18, 2024, AB 2011 makes the Family Leave Mediation Program permanent, since its temporary installment in 2020. The Family Leave Mediation Program assists small employers (5-19 employees) with resolving disputed claims under the California Family Rights Act (CFRA). Also, on June 1, 2024, funding was renewed for the Paid Family Leave Grants Program, which provides financial assistance to small businesses when employees take CFRA leave. The program offers up to $2,000 per employee to businesses with one to 50 employees, and up to $1,000 per employee for those with 51 to 100 employees. Review the FAQ’s for more information.

 

California: Arbitration Agreements Are Not Void Following Three Strikes

On July 15, 2024, in Ramirez v. Charter Communications, Inc., the California Supreme Court said that an arbitration agreement is not automatically void simply because three or more provisions are found to be unconscionable. There is no set rule on the number of invalid components to an arbitration agreement that would render the whole agreement void. Rather, courts must use a three-prong test to determine how to manage the unconscionable terms and whether to enforce the rest of the agreement.

 

California: Updated Workers’ Compensation Poster

As of January 1, 2025, AB 1870 requires workers’ compensation posters to state that the “injured employee may consult a licensed attorney to advise them of their rights under workers’ compensation laws; and in most instances, attorney’s fees will be paid from an injured employee’s recovery.” Although attorneys are not necessary to navigate the workers’ compensation process, the notice is meant to provide clarity on employee rights to legal counsel if they choose.

 

Delaware: Employers Must Register for EARNS Program

By October 15, 2024, Delaware employers with five or more covered employees must register for the Delaware Expanding Access for Retirement and Necessary Savings (EARNS) Program, or otherwise certify their exemption. The EARNS Program officially launched on July 1, 2024. The program is an automatic payroll deduction IRA program that provides retirement savings options for employees who work for employers that do not offer a retirement plan. Employees are eligible for the program if they have wages or other compensation allocable to Delaware and they are at least 18 years of age. Employers are covered if they have at least five covered employees, have been in business in Delaware for at least six months in the immediately preceding calendar year and they do not maintain a specified tax-favored retirement plan.

 

Hawaii: Increased Minimum Salary for Highly Compensated Employees

Effective June 21, 2024, HB 2463 increases the minimum monthly salary for highly compensated employees in Hawaii. Previously, to be exempt from the state’s minimum wage and overtime requirements, a highly compensated employee must have earned a guaranteed compensation totaling $2,000 or more a month, whether paid weekly, biweekly, or monthly. Under the amended law, the threshold is increased to $4,000 or more per month in total guaranteed compensation.

 

Indiana: Updates to State New Hire Reporting Requirements

Indiana employers are required to register with and report newly hired and rehired employees to the Indiana New Hire Reporting Center. Effective July 1, 2024, SB 148 requires that all reports be submitted electronically, twice a month, 12 to 16 days apart, using one of the following methods: 1) online through the Center’s portal; 2) magnetically on diskette, CD-ROM, reel tape or cartridges mailed to the Center; or 3) through file transfer protocol, electronic file transfer or encrypted email files. All reports must include the following information: 1) the employee’s name, address and Social Security number; 2) employee’s hire date (i.e., the date the employee first performed worked for pay); 3) employee’s starting pay; 4) employee’s current primary standard occupational classification code; and 5) the employer’s name, address, payroll processing address, Federal Employer Tax Identification Number, and whether reporting as a multistate employer.

 

Louisiana: Permitless Concealed Carry of Handguns Allowed

Effective July 4, 2024, Louisiana’s SB 152 allows those at least 18 years old who can legally possess a handgun to concealed carry without a permit. There are some limitations to permitless concealed carry in the law: (1) individuals cannot carry and conceal a handgun while under the influence of alcohol or a controlled dangerous substance; and (2) individuals must notify any police officer who approaches them while carrying concealed that they have a weapon on their person, submit to a pat down, and allow the officer to temporarily disarm them. Employers can still implement workplace policies that ban weapons and handguns at their worksites.

 

Louisiana: Child Labor Meal Breaks Limited

Effective August 1, 2024, HB 156 amends its existing meal period law for minors. Under the amendment, only minors under 16-years-old are entitled to a 30-minute meal period for any five-hour period worked. Notably, this amendment excludes 16 and 17-year-olds from the meal period requirement.

 

New Hampshire: Wages for Deceased Employees

Effective September 10, 2024, HB 1201 increases the amount of wages owed to an employee who died, from $300 to $3,000, that can be paid directly to the decedent without triggering the probate process. Amounts up to the increased threshold may be paid to decedents without requiring letters of testamentary or of administration.

 

Pennsylvania: Amendments to Distracted Driving Law

Effective June 5, 2024, SB 37 amends Pennsylvania’s distracted driving law to clarify certain definitions, prohibited activities and exceptions. Of note, the amended law now prohibits the use of “interactive mobile devices” while driving, except in emergency situations. “Interactive mobile device” includes handheld wireless telephones, personal digital assistants, smart phones, portable or mobile computers or similar devices which can be used for voice communication, texting, emailing, browsing the internet, instant messaging, playing games, taking or transmitting images, recording or broadcasting videos, creating or sharing social media, or otherwise sending or receiving electronic data.

 

Pennsylvania: Limits Non-Compete Agreements for Healthcare Providers

As of January 1, 2025, the Fair Contracting for Health Care Practitioners Act will limit noncompete covenants, including patient nonsolicitation provisions, between an employer and health care practitioner to instances where the agreement is no longer than one year and the health care practitioner was “not dismissed by the employer.”  The rule does not apply in the context of a business sale. There are also certain patient notification requirements in the event of a healthcare provider departure.

 


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. © 2024 ManagEase