Posts

Get Ready for California Legislative Updates in 2020!

APPLIES TO

All Employers with CA Employees

EFFECTIVE

January 1, 2020

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

The California Legislature tends to pass the hard-hitting employment law changes at the end of its session. Here are key updates employers should be aware of.

  • AB 9 | DFEH Claims Extended. Extends the statute of limitations to three years for all claims filed with the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH), like claims for sexual harassment, harassment, discrimination, and retaliation. Extending the time to file a claim highlights the need for employers to document all claims, investigations, and discipline.
  • AB 51 | Ban on Mandatory Arbitration. Employers will soon no longer be able to require employees to execute arbitration agreements as a condition of employment. However, it is unclear if agreements subject to the Federal Arbitration Act are exempt. The bill applies to contracts entered into, modified, or extended on or after January 1, 2020. Stay tuned … legal challenges are on the horizon.
  • AB 749 | No Rehire Agreements. Employers cannot enter into settlement agreements whereby an employee, who has made a claim against the employer, agrees they cannot obtain future employment from the employer. The rule does not apply where the employer made a good faith determination that the employee engaged in sexual harassment or sexual assault.
  • SB 142 | Lactation Accommodations. Employer obligations for lactation accommodations are expanded to provide nursing individuals with break time “each time such employee has need to express breast milk.” There are also increased requirements for an approved lactation room. Employers must also provide employees with a written lactation accommodation policy.
  • SB 188 | Hairstyle Protections. SB 188 amended the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) to include protections for hairstyles, subject to limited exceptions.
  • SB 707 | Arbitration Fees. If an employer with an arbitration agreement fails to pay the required fees to initiate an arbitration proceeding within 30 days after the due date, it is in material breach of the arbitration agreement, is in default of the arbitration, and waives its right to compel arbitration.

Action Items

  1. Review claims procedures and documentation processes.
  2. Have managers trained on managing employee claims.
  3. Have arbitration agreements reviewed by legal counsel.
  4. Review no hire agreements with legal counsel.
  5. Ensure that appropriate lactation accommodations are or can be made available; otherwise, review with legal counsel to determine whether an undue hardship exemption may apply.
  6. Prepare and distribute lactation accommodation policy.
  7. Have dress code and discrimination policies updated, and hiring practices reviewed.
  8. Subscribers can call our HR On-Call Hotline at (888) 378-2456 for further assistance.

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.

© 2019 ManagEase

September Updates

APPLIES TO

Varies

EFFECTIVE

Varies

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

This Short List addresses the following topics:
  1. REMINDER! EEO-1 Component 2 Reporting is Due September 30th
  2. DOL Says DOT Drivers Sleeping in Berths While Off-Duty is Unpaid Time
  3. 2nd Circuit: Collectively Bargained Arbitration is Governed by the Scope of the Agreement
  4. 9th Circuit: The Dynamex Independent Contractor Test Does Not Apply Retroactively – For Now
  5. New Noncompete Restrictions in Maine, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island
  6. Arizona: Mini-COBRA and Bona Fide Associations Updates
  7. California: Hairstyles Soon to Be Protected From Discrimination
  8. Emeryville, CA: Small Independent Restaurant Minimum Wage Hold Repealed
  9. Florida: Unemployment Compensation Protections for Domestic Violence Victims
  10. Indiana: Direct Sellers are Exempt from Minimum Wage Rules
  11. Iowa: Enacts Negligent Hiring Protections for Employers
  12. Louisiana: Electronic Notice to Employees Permitted for Group Health Insurance Plans
  13. Kansas City, MO: Enacts Salary History Inquiry Ban
  14. New Hampshire: Child Labor Hours Restricted
  15. New York: Paid Family Leave Benefit Schedule Update
  16. New York: Whistleblower’s Immigration Status is Protected
  17. Ohio: Motor Carrier Drivers Excluded from Definition of “Employee”
  18. Pittsburgh, PA: Paid Sick Leave is Revived by State Supreme Court
  19. Vermont: Expunged Records Make Criminal Convictions Vanish
  20. Virginia: Updates to Minimum Wage Exemptions and Nondisclosure Agreements
  21. West Virginia: Effect of Expunged Criminal Convictions

Read more

Arbitration Agreements Must Exempt NLRA Claims According to the NLRB

APPLIES TO

All Employers Subject to the NLRA

EFFECTIVE

June 18, 2019

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

In Prime Healthcare, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) stated that an arbitration agreement that did not expressly exclude claims filed with the NLRB was invalid. There, the arbitration agreement simply required that all claims between the employer and employee be subject to arbitration. There were a few exceptions identified for workers’ compensation and unemployment claims, but not for National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) claims processed through the NLRB.

The Board stated that although the arbitration agreement did not expressly state that NLRB claims are subject to the arbitration agreement, because it called for “all claims” to be arbitrated, with limited exceptions, it restricted employees’ access to the NLRB and its processes. The Board ordered the employer to rescind the unlawful agreement and provide notice to current and former employees.

Employers should ensure that arbitration agreements expressly exclude NLRB claims. A general disclaimer excluding anything that would interfere with employee rights may not be sufficient.

Action Items

  1. Have arbitration agreements reviewed with legal counsel.
  2. Subscribers can call our HR On-Call Hotline at (888) 378-2456 for further assistance.

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.

© 2019 ManagEase

Colorado: Court of Appeal Broadens Arbitration Agreements and Expands Duty-of-Loyalty Claims

APPLIES TO

All Employers with CO Employees

EFFECTIVE

September 20, 2018

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

In Digital Landscape Inc. v. Media Kings LLC, the Colorado Court of Appeal reviewed the scope of an arbitration agreement’s reach. Specifically, the agreement stated all claims “arising under” the contract at issue would be arbitrated. The court broadly interpreted the wording, stating that “arising under” had the same meaning as “relating to,” because the phrase “arising under” implies a broad scope consistent with both federal and Colorado policies favoring arbitration.

There, Digital Landscape claimed breach of contract for Media Kings’ failure to pay under the contract, and Media Kings claimed it was damaged when Digital Landscape took over one of Media Kings’ clients that Digital was supposed to be servicing as an agent of Media; the latter was disputed by Digital as being covered by the agreement to arbitrate. The court stated that Media’s claim was covered by the “arising under” language in the arbitration agreement; moreover, the parties could have drafted the arbitration clause to include limiting language or to explicitly exclude particular types of claims from its scope. There was no indication that the “arising under” was meant to limit the scope of arbitrated claims.

Additionally, the court interpreted Media’s claim against Digital to include an unpled duty-of-loyalty claim, because the description of Media’s claim was sufficient to be interpreted as such. Although Digital was not an employee of Media, it was found by the arbitrator to be an agent of Media as an independent contractor. This opens new avenues of protections for employers who may now be able to recover additional damages, such as disgorgement, lost assets, or lost profits, from former employees and independent contractors.

Action Items

  1. Have arbitration agreements reviewed by legal counsel for consistency with this ruling.
  2. Subscribers can call our HR On-Call Hotline at (888) 378-2456 for further assistance.

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

February Updates

APPLIES TO

Varies

EFFECTIVE

Varies

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

This Short List addresses the following topics:
  1. REMINDER: Post OSHA 300A Summary
  2. Civil Money Penalties for 2018 Increased
  3. Second Circuit: FLSA Claims are Subject to Arbitration
  4. California: Attorney General Emphasizes Intent to Prosecute Employers Who Help Immigration Sweeps
  5. Connecticut: Pregnancy Discrimination and Accommodation Posting Required
  6. Massachusetts:  Supreme Judicial Court Limits Wage Act Liability
  7. New York City, NY: Fair Workweek Deductions Law Put on Ice—For Now

Read more

California: Arbitration May be Enforced For Certain Wage and Hour Claims

APPLIES TO

All Employers with CA Employees

EFFECTIVE

August 3 and 21, 2017

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

Two recent state Court of Appeal cases permit arbitration of certain wage and hour claims, including representative actions under the Private Attorney Generals Act (“PAGA”) and an administrative wage claim filed before the Department of Labor Standards Enforcement (“DLSE”), under certain circumstances.

Sixth Circuit: Arbitration Provisions Prohibiting Concerted Protected Activity are Unenforceable

APPLIES TO

All Employers with KY, MI, OH, and TN Employees

EFFECTIVE

May 26, 2017

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

In National Labor Relations Board v. Alternative Entertainment, Inc., the Sixth Circuit court joined the Seventh and Ninth circuits in holding that mandatory arbitration provisions that contain class action waivers are unenforceable under the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”).  The Second, Fifth, and Eighth circuit courts took the opposite opinion.

U.S. Supreme Court: Individual States Cannot Treat Arbitration Agreements Different From Contracts

APPLIES TO

All States

EFFECTIVE

May 15, 2017

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

The U.S. Supreme Court has reaffirmed its strong support of the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) by remanding a recent Kentucky Supreme Court decision that targeted arbitration agreements.  The U.S. Supreme Court stated that the FAA requires all states to treat arbitration and other types of contract agreements equally, and any state regulations that disfavor or discriminate against arbitration are invalid under the FAA.

Seventh Circuit States Class Action Waivers in Arbitration Agreements are Invalid

APPLIES TO

All Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin Employers

EFFECTIVE

May 26, 2016

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

In Lewis v. Epic Systems Corporation, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously stated that arbitration agreements that prohibit collective arbitration or collective actions, including class, collective and representative actions, violate Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”).

CA Supreme Court Rules Class Action Waivers in Arbitration Agreements Enforceable

APPLIES TO

Employers with arbitration agreements in place or

employers considering implementing arbitration agreements

EFFECTIVE

Immediately

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

The California Supreme Court has recently ruled that class action waivers contained in arbitration agreements are enforceable.  These arbitration agreements with class action waivers create guidelines where an employer would only engage in individual arbitration with each employee bringing a claim against the employer, rather than employees banding together to bring one class action suit against the employer.

Read more