|
APPLIES TO Certain Employers with Employees in CA, DC, IL, ME, MD, MN, OR |
EFFECTIVE July 1, 2018 |
QUESTIONS? Contact HR On-Call |
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.
|
APPLIES TO All Employers with AK, AZ, CA, HI, ID, MT, NV, OR, and WA Employees |
EFFECTIVE April 26, 2018 |
QUESTIONS? Contact HR On-Call |
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.
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 CA Employees |
EFFECTIVE July 1, 2018 |
QUESTIONS? Contact HR On-Call |
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.
|
APPLIES TO All Employers with CA Employees |
EFFECTIVE May 22 and 23, 2018 |
QUESTIONS? Contact HR On-Call |
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.
|
APPLIES TO All Employers with San Francisco Employees |
EFFECTIVE June 7 and July 1, 2018 |
QUESTIONS? Contact HR On-Call |
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.
|
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 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 Varies |
EFFECTIVE Varies |
QUESTIONS? Contact HR On-Call (888) 378-2456 |
|
APPLIES TO Employers with CA Employees |
EFFECTIVE February 23, 2018 |
QUESTIONS? Contact HR On-Call |
A California Court of Appeal recently stated that the provisions of the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) is unenforceable in employment contracts for employees who engage in interstate or foreign transportation, regardless of whether the employer is in the transportation industry.
|
APPLIES TO Varies |
EFFECTIVE Varies |
QUESTIONS? Contact HR On-Call (888) 378-2456 |