Connecticut joins a growing list of states with salary history inquiry bans designed to promote wage equality among genders. Public Act No. 18-8, An Act Concerning Pay Equity (the “Act”), goes into effect on January 1, 2019, and bans Connecticut employers from making inquiries into an applicant’s prior wage information at any point during the hiring process. The ban also prohibits third parties from making salary history inquiries on behalf of the employer, which would include staffing agencies and recruiters. However, applicants may choose to volunteer this information. Additionally, employers may inquire about components of an applicant’s compensation structure (e.g., previous stock options, equity incentives, etc.), provided that the employer does not inquire about the value of those components.
Currently, Connecticut already has a number of applicant protections in place. Employers have already been prohibited from certain actions, such as preventing employees from inquiring into or disclosing wage information from or to another employee, forcing employees to waive their right to discuss wage information as a condition of employment, or penalizing employees for discussing wage information.
Under the Act, an aggrieved employee or applicant may sue an employer within two years of any alleged violation of the Act.
Upcoming Minimum Wage Increases
/in HR AlertsAPPLIES TO
Certain Employers with Employees in CA, DC, IL, ME, MD, MN, OR
EFFECTIVE
July 1, 2018
QUESTIONS?
Contact HR On-Call
(888) 378-2456
Minimum wage increases typically fall into the beginning or middle of each calendar year, with many states or localities increasing minimum wage rates in July. Below is a short list of localities with upcoming minimum wage increases effective July 1, 2018.
Fifth Circuit: Clarification on Small Vehicle Exception to the Motor Carrier Act Overtime Exemption
/in HR AlertsAPPLIES TO
All Employers with LA, MS, TX Employees Operating Commercial Motor Vehicles
EFFECTIVE
May 16, 2018
QUESTIONS?
Contact HR On-Call
(888) 378-2456
In Carley v. Crest Pumping Technologies, LLC, the Fifth Circuit recently clarified ambiguities in the small vehicle exception to the Motor Carrier Act (MCA) overtime exemption. Generally, the overtime requirements under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) do not apply to employees covered by the MCA, except for employees who operate vehicles weighing 10,000 lbs. or less under certain conditions (“small vehicle exception”).
Sixth Circuit: Do Volunteers Have an Expectation of Compensation?
/in HR AlertsAPPLIES TO
All Employers with KY, MI, OH, TN Volunteers
EFFECTIVE
April 16, 2018
QUESTIONS?
Contact HR On-Call
(888) 378-2456
In Acosta v. Cathedral Buffet, the Sixth Circuit recently clarified the definition of a volunteer. There, a buffet restaurant, a for-profit corporation operated by Grace Cathedral, used volunteers to service patrons in addition to regular employees. The faith leader at Grace Cathedral told church members that God was calling on them to volunteer at the buffet, and that failing to do so was tantamount to a sin under the church’s doctrine. As a result of the church’s strategies, many members did volunteer. Employees and volunteers performed the same restaurant-related tasks; however, volunteers were not paid for their time.
Seventh Circuit: ADEA Applies to Employees and Job Applicants
/in HR AlertsAPPLIES TO
All Employers with IL, IN, and WI Employees
EFFECTIVE
April 26, 2018
QUESTIONS?
Contact HR On-Call
(888) 378-2456
In a split from an Eleventh Circuit ruling last year, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals recently stated that the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (“ADEA”) provides protections not only to current employees aged 40 or older, but to similarly situated job applicants as well.
Ninth Circuit: Tribal Casinos Must Obey NLRA
/in HR AlertsAPPLIES TO
All Employers with AK, AZ, CA, HI, ID, MT, NV, OR, and WA Employees
EFFECTIVE
April 26, 2018
QUESTIONS?
Contact HR On-Call
(888) 378-2456
According to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, even self-governed tribal land must obey the provisions of the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”). In National Labor Relations Board v. Casino Pauma, the circuit court stated that the casino violated the NLRA by attempting to limit protected union activity.
Under the NLRA, employees have the right to engage in specified protected activities relating to improving or discussing working conditions, free of employer retaliation or adverse action. At Casino Pauma, operated by the Pauma Band of Mission Indians and located on the tribe’s reservation, a number of casino workers began distributing union leaflets to customers entering the casino. The employees were originally removed by security. When they attempted to distribute leaflets some weeks later, the employees were disciplined.
The NLRB filed a complaint on behalf of the employees. An administrative law judge found that the casino violated the NLRA by attempting to interfere with protected union activities, and the circuit court agreed, stating that the NLRA applies to tribal employers.
Action Items
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
Tenth Circuit: Changing Termination Reasons Held as Pretext for Employment Discrimination
/in HR AlertsAPPLIES TO
All Employers with CO, KS, NM, OK, UT, and WY Employees
EFFECTIVE
May 15, 2018
QUESTIONS?
Contact HR On-Call
(888) 378-2456
The Tenth Circuit Court’s decision in Fassbender v. Correct Care Sols., LLC, reminds employers of the importance of weighing termination decisions with care. In Fassbender, an employer’s decision to terminate a pregnant employee was determined to be a pretext for discrimination, due in part to the employer’s inconsistent reasoning for the termination.
California: FEHA Amendments Expand Protections Related to “National Origin”
/in HR AlertsAPPLIES TO
All Employers with CA Employees
EFFECTIVE
July 1, 2018
QUESTIONS?
Contact HR On-Call
(888) 378-2456
The Office of Administrative Law recently approved amendments to the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), which include, in part, changes to the state’s anti-harassment, discrimination, and retaliation requirements related to the national origin of employees and job applicants, regardless of documented status. These amendments go into effect July 1, 2018.
California: New PAGA Interpretations Continue to Increase Employer Exposure
/in HR AlertsAPPLIES TO
All Employers with CA Employees
EFFECTIVE
May 22 and 23, 2018
QUESTIONS?
Contact HR On-Call
(888) 378-2456
Two recent California cases have greatly expanded the ability for employees to sue employers under the Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”). A favorite of plaintiffs’ attorneys, PAGA allows an employee to bring a suit against an employer on behalf of other aggrieved employees, potentially recovering significant penalties as well as attorneys’ fees. PAGA suits can and have been used against employers for even minor technical violations, such as a business listing an abbreviated name rather than the legal name of the organization on pay stubs.
San Francisco, CA: Important Dates for San Francisco’s Minimum Wage, Sick Leave and Pay Parity Ordinances
/in HR AlertsAPPLIES TO
All Employers with San Francisco Employees
EFFECTIVE
June 7 and July 1, 2018
QUESTIONS?
Contact HR On-Call
(888) 378-2456
San Francisco is home to a bevy of local ordinances controlling minimum wage, paid sick leave, and pay parity, among others. Though these ordinances have been in place for some time, each has new guidance or important updates that are effective within the next two months.
Connecticut: New Pay Equity Bill Prohibits Wage and Salary History Inquiries
/in HR AlertsAPPLIES TO
All Employers with CT Employees
EFFECTIVE
January 1, 2019
QUESTIONS?
Contact HR On-Call
(888) 378-2456
Connecticut joins a growing list of states with salary history inquiry bans designed to promote wage equality among genders. Public Act No. 18-8, An Act Concerning Pay Equity (the “Act”), goes into effect on January 1, 2019, and bans Connecticut employers from making inquiries into an applicant’s prior wage information at any point during the hiring process. The ban also prohibits third parties from making salary history inquiries on behalf of the employer, which would include staffing agencies and recruiters. However, applicants may choose to volunteer this information. Additionally, employers may inquire about components of an applicant’s compensation structure (e.g., previous stock options, equity incentives, etc.), provided that the employer does not inquire about the value of those components.
Currently, Connecticut already has a number of applicant protections in place. Employers have already been prohibited from certain actions, such as preventing employees from inquiring into or disclosing wage information from or to another employee, forcing employees to waive their right to discuss wage information as a condition of employment, or penalizing employees for discussing wage information.
Under the Act, an aggrieved employee or applicant may sue an employer within two years of any alleged violation of the Act.
Action Items
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