Posts

Ninth Circuit Overrules Itself: Prior Salary History Cannot Justify Wage Differential Between Men and Women

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

(888) 378-2456

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.

May Updates

APPLIES TO

Varies

EFFECTIVE

Varies

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

This Short List addresses the following topics:
  1. EEO-1 Deadline Delayed to June 1, 2018
  2. IRS Issues Guidance on Family and Medical Leave Tax Credit
  3. Veteran Hiring Benchmark Lowered for 2018
  4. IRS Rolls Back 2018 HSA Contribution Limit Change
  5. U.S. DOL Launches Payroll Audit Pilot Program
  6. U.S. Supreme Court Settles FLSA Status of Car Dealership Service Advisors
  7. California: Staffing Agencies Need Not Police Meal Periods
  8. Emeryville, California: Minimum Wage Update
  9. Michigan: Local Governments Prohibited from Limiting Employer Interview Inquiries
  10. Nevada: Minimum Wage Will Not Change in 2018
  11. Pennsylvania: State Supreme Court Says “Actual Damages” Include Non-Economic Damages Under Whistleblower Law
  12. West Virginia: Employers May Not Prohibit Firearm Storage in Personal Vehicles

Read more

Ninth Circuit: DOL’s 80/20 Tip Credit Rule is Invalid

APPLIES TO

All Employers of AK, AZ, CA, GA, HI, ID, MT, NV, OR, WA Employees

EFFECTIVE

September 6, 2017

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

The Department of Labor (“DOL”) permits employers to give a tip credit to tipped employees who spend no more than 20% of their time performing non-tipped duties. In Marsh v. J. Alexander’s, LLC, the Ninth Circuit noted that this rule is only found in the Field Operations Handbook used by the DOL as guidance for investigations by field officers, rather than in a statute or regulation; as a result, the court stated it was not valid.

September Updates

APPLIES TO

Varies

EFFECTIVE

Varies

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

This Short List addresses the following topics:
  1. The Recent Federal Overtime Exemption Rule is Diminishing
  2. NLRB: More Examples of What is or isn’t Protected Concerted Activities on Facebook
  3. EEOC Must Reconsider Wellness Regulations
  4. Seventh Circuit: EEOC May Investigate Despite Right-to-Sue Letter and Issue of Judgment
  5. Arizona, Maryland, Wyoming:  Now Part of the E-Verify RIDE Program
  6. Berkeley, CA: Minimum Wage Increase, Paid Sick Leave, and Work Schedule Rules Will Soon Be In Effect
  7. San Diego, CA:  Equal Pay Bill for City Contractors and Consultants
  8. Santa Clara, CA: Santa Clara City’s Minimum Wage to Increase in 2018
  9. Connecticut: Anti-Discrimination Protections Expanded for Veterans
  10. Georgia: Amended Law Now Preempts Predictive Scheduling Ordinances
  11. New Jersey:  Anti-Discrimination Protections for Military and Veterans Expanded
  12. New York: Guidance on Tax Treatment of PFL Contributions and Benefits now Available
  13. Nevada: Pregnant Workers’ Fairness Act Poster Now Available
  14. North Carolina:  Fair Classification Act Emphasizes State Focus on Proper Employee Classification
  15. Texas: Hurricane Harvey Relief for Employees
  16. Washington:  New Biometric Information Protection law

Read more

Nevada: New Nursing Mothers’ Law, Employees’ Right to Discuss Wages, New Domestic Violence Victims’ Leave

APPLIES TO

All Employers with NV Employees

EFFECTIVE

Varies; See Below

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

The Nevada legislature has been keeping busy over the past few months.  With the passage of several bills concerning pregnant worker’s rights, lactation accommodations, employee wage disclosures, and leave for victims of domestic violence, employers of individuals working in Nevada must keep abreast of many new procedural regulations.

Nevada: Employers May Use Fluctuating Workweek to Compensate Certain Employees

APPLIES TO

All Employers with NV Employees

EFFECTIVE

May 25, 2017

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

The Nevada Labor Commission recently issued an Advisory Opinion regarding the fluctuating workweek (“FWW”) method of pay.  The Opinion states that employers can use FWW to pay overtime hours worked in excess of 40 hours per week by a non-exempt employee who is paid a fixed-salary for all hours worked.

Nevada: Rules for Restrictive Non-Compete Agreements Change Again

APPLIES TO

All Employers with NV Employees

EFFECTIVE

June 3, 2017

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

Previously, the Nevada Supreme Court declared that overly broad non-compete agreements will be wholly unenforceable, meaning agreements containing overly restrictive provisions beyond what is needed to protect an employer’s interest will be void in total.  The Supreme Court stated that “blue penciling,” or modify parts of an agreement to make it enforceable, would not be allowed.

Nevada: Workplace Protections, New Notice Requirements for Pregnancy-Related Conditions

APPLIES TO

All Employers of 15+ NV Employees

EFFECTIVE

June 2, 2017 and October 1, 2017

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

SB 253, also known as the Nevada Pregnant Workers’ Fairness Act (the “Act”), provides broader workplace protections for workers affected by pregnancy-related conditions. Employers are now responsible for (1) providing accommodations for pregnancy-related conditions, and (2) informing female workers of their rights to such accommodations.

Ninth Circuit: Prior Salary History may be used to Justify Wage Differentials Between Men and Women

APPLIES TO

All Employers with AK, AZ, CA, GU, HI,
ID, MT, NV, OR and WA Employees

EFFECTIVE

April 27, 2017

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

Last week, the Ninth Circuit ruled on Rizo v. Yovino, a wage inequality claim brought under the federal Equal Pay Act.  In reviewing this case, the Ninth Circuit affirmed a previous case, Kouba v. Allstate Insurance Co., and confirmed that prior salary history may be considered a “factor other than sex” for the purpose of justifying a wage differential.

Ninth Circuit: Wage Rates Used for Overtime Hours Cannot Be Lower Than Those Used for Non-Overtime Hours

APPLIES TO

All Employers with AK, AZ, CA, GU, HI, ID, MT, NV, OR and WA Employees

EFFECTIVE

March 21, 2017

QUESTIONS?

Contact HR On-Call

(888) 378-2456

In Brunozzi v. Cable Communications, Inc., the Ninth Circuit stated that wage rates cannot be decreased in weeks when overtime is worked, as compared to weeks when no overtime is worked. There, two cable technicians were paid a piece rate per cable system installed, plus a contractually-based production bonus each pay period as part of their regular wages.  When the employer calculated overtime, it reduced the production bonus by the amount of overtime paid for piece rate work, which meant that employees received lower wage rates than when they did not work overtime.