|
APPLIES TO All Employers |
EFFECTIVE January 1, 2016 |
QUESTIONS? Contact HR On-Call (888) 378-2456 |
|
APPLIES TO Varies |
EFFECTIVE Varies |
QUESTIONS? Contact HR On-Call (888) 378-2456 |
|
APPLIES TO Varies |
EFFECTIVE Varies |
QUESTIONS? Contact HR On-Call (888) 378-2456 |
|
APPLIES TO California Private Employers with 5+ Employees; |
EFFECTIVE April 1, 2016 |
QUESTIONS? Contact HR On-Call (888) 378-2456 |
Earlier this month, the Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”) regulations were revised, changing, in part, the California Pregnancy Disability Leave notice that employers are required to post. Specifically, the change relates to the language required in the notice itself. Employers have the option to (1) post the revised notice specified in the regulations, unless it is inconsistent with the employer’s own policy, or (2) post a notice developed by the employer that is consistent with the regulatory requirements.
|
APPLIES TO Varies |
EFFECTIVE Varies |
QUESTIONS? Contact HR On-Call (888) 378-2456 |
This HR Alert addresses the following topics:
|
APPLIES TO All Employers |
EFFECTIVE August 1, 2016 |
QUESTIONS? Contact HR On-Call (888) 378-2456 |
On November 2, 2015, President Obama signed H.R. 1314, also known as the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015, which contains a provision that would allow the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”) the ability to increase penalty fines as much as 82%. This provision allows OSHA a “catch-up adjustment” to compensate for over two decades of static fines. It has not yet been confirmed that OSHA will choose to increase penalties to the full 82% allowed; the provision simply grants OSHA the ability to do so, and does not actually require such action. However, increases are highly likely based upon previous commentary from OSHA leadership about the benefits of stiffer regulatory punishments. Initial penalty increases are mandated to become effective as of August 1, 2016; however, the new penalties can be assessed to violations occurring before the penalty increase.
This information applies to all employers nationwide, even those who do not have a typically hazardous work environment. Citations for violating seemingly minor safety regulations, especially repeat violations, could now cost almost double the previous maximum fine.
|
APPLIES TO All California Employers who Employ Piece-Rate Employees |
EFFECTIVE January 1, 2016 |
QUESTIONS? Contact HR On-Call (888) 378-2456 |
On October 10, 2015, Gov. Brown signed AB 1513 into law, adding Section 226.2 to the California Labor Code. This legislation is a response to prior court rulings related to required compensation for mandated breaks and other nonproductive time. Specifically, the bill sets forth minimum compensation requirements for rest and recovery periods and other nonproductive time for piece-rate workers, in addition to and separate from their established piece rates. Each type of compensation must also be documented on an employee’s paystub. Additionally, employers who have not been paying piece-workers for this additional time have the opportunity to resolve back claims without litigation. This statute will become effective on January 1, 2016, but will have retroactive repercussions for wages earned as of July 1, 2012.
This information applies to all companies who employ piece-rate workers in California. Examples of employees who are compensated as piece-rate workers include, but are not limited to, those who may do installation work, closing financial transactions when paid a flat rate, agricultural work, manufacturing work, logistics work when a piece rate applies to drivers’ deliveries, etc.
|
APPLIES TO All California Employers and Employees |
EFFECTIVE January 1, 2016 |
QUESTIONS? Contact HR On-Call (888) 378-2456 |
On October 6, 2015, Governor Brown signed into law Senate Bill (SB) 358, referred to as the Fair Pay Act. The Act amends Labor Code Section 1197.5 to require that employers prove wage disparities among men and women are not gender based. The Act also penalizes employers for preventing employees from discussing wages. Finally, it increases recordkeeping requirements. These requirements apply both to California employers and companies with employees in California. Although the changes become effective January 1, 2016, employers need to prepare for the effects the changes will create. Additionally, the Act may lead to increased litigation, because the hurdles are being lowered for plaintiffs to bring lawsuits. It may also be a gateway for new class action lawsuits, because attorneys will likely be looking for systemic gender wage disparity within individual companies.
|
APPLIES TO All Employers |
EFFECTIVE April 13, 2015 and September 1, 2015 |
QUESTIONS? Contact HR On-Call (888) 378-2456 |
With the recent National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) ruling redefining joint employer status, more employers may have to be conscious of the changing regulations regarding collective bargaining procedures. Throughout 2015, the NLRB has issued some updates to the rules governing union elections and petitions. Companies that may now be categorized as a joint employer, and therefore potentially subject to union activity of the shared workforce, should review these updated rules, summarized below.
|
APPLIES TO All Employers |
EFFECTIVE August 27, 2015 |
QUESTIONS? Contact HR On-Call (888) 378-2456 |
In a 3-2 decision involving Browning-Ferris Industries of California, the National Labor Relations Board revised its standard for determining joint-employer status last Thursday, August 27, 2015.
Specifically, the Board defined an employment relationship as one where the employer either exercises control or has the right to exercise control over the work of the employee. The latter is an added factor meant to bring NLRB standards in line with existing law. Thus, in determining joint employer status, where a “user employer reserves a contractual right to set a specific term or condition of employment for a supplier employer’s workers, it retains the ultimate authority” over the employee and “legal consequences may follow from this choice.”