On Tuesday, January 22nd, at 1 pm EST, join Andrew J. Sommer and Beeta B. Lashkari of Conn Maciel Carey’s national Labor & Employment Practice Group for a complimentary webinar: California Employment Law Update for 2019: New Legal Requirements and Practical Compliance Strategies Every HR Professional and Manager Should Know.“
In the final days of California’s 2018 legislative session, Governor Jerry Brown has signed into law a variety of employment bills, including a flurry of new laws addressing the #MeToo movement and increased efforts to address harassment and discrimination in the workplace. While many of the new laws impose additional requirements on employers, a few clarify the reach of existing employment laws or carve out exceptions to wage and hour requirements. This webinar will review compliance obligations for companies doing business in California, as well as discuss the practical impact of these new laws and recent court decisions and best practices for avoiding potential employment-related claims.
Participants will learn about the following:
-
Expanded anti-harassment training requirements covering both supervisory and nonsupervisory employees
-
Limits on confidentiality of settlement agreements involving certain types of claims for sexual assault, harassment and discrimination
-
Limits on releasing claims of discrimination and harassment as a condition of employment, continued employment or in exchange for a raise or bonus
-
Expansion of privilege protections to cover communications with prospective employers about sexual harassment
-
New training requirements for hotels regarding human trafficking
-
Clarification of the existing prohibition against considering an applicant’s salary history
-
Clarification of existing lawmaking construction contractors liable for their subcontractors’ wage violations
-
New exceptions to meal period requirements for certain motor carriers and rest period requirements for certain employees in the petroleum industry
-
Temporary carve-out from PAGA liability for construction employees covered by collective bargaining agreements
-
New requirements concerning lactation accommodations
-
Significant new court decisions concerning the independent contractor relationship, wage and hour requirements and the enforceability of existing California law prohibiting employers from volunteering personnel information to immigration authorities
-
Current minimum wage requirements both statewide and on local level
The webinar will also address steps employers can take to achieve compliance including evaluating current personnel practices and updating employee handbooks, employment agreements and training protocol.
Under this rule, if a tipped employee spent more than 20% of his or her working time performing “non-tipped” duties, his or her employer could not take a tip credit for time spent performing those non-tipped duties. The rule caused years of confusion, especially among employers. After all, what duties exactly qualified as “non-tipped”? Would folding napkins in between waiting tables count? And were employers expected to track every second of an employee’s day to determine if those non-tipped duties exceeded 20% of the total workday?
In 1997, the U.S. Supreme Court decided the case of Auer v. Robbins, establishing the standard for what has become known as Auer deference (or Seminole Rock Deference from Bowles v. Seminole Rock and Sand Co. (1945)). This decision and the standard it set is significant for employers because it gives substantial latitude to federal agencies, like the Department of Labor, to interpret their own ambiguous standards. Specifically, in Auer, the Supreme Court held that an Agency’s, in this case the Department of Labor, interpretation of its own standards is “controlling unless ‘plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation.’” In other words, if it’s not clear what is required by the plain language of the standard, the Court will generally defer to the Agency’s own reasonable interpretations of its regulations.
On October 31, 2018, roughly one year after the beginning of the #MeToo movement, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) held a public meeting at agency headquarters in Washington, D.C. entitled “Revamping Workplace Culture to Prevent Harassment.” The purpose of this meeting was to hear various approaches that different industries are implementing to prevent harassment and provide employers the skills, resources, and knowledge to respond workplace harassment.
