What Employers Need to Know About COVID-19 Vaccines [Webinar Recording]

Theresa Green Leave a comment

On February 11th, Kara M. Maciel, Fern Fleischer-Daves and Lindsay A. DiSalvo presented a webinar regarding What Employers Need to Know About COVID-19 Vaccine.Capture

In December 2020, two COVID-19 vaccines received emergency use authorization from the US government and several more vaccines may be approved in the coming months. In the initial phases, front-line health care workers, nursing home residents, persons over 75 years of age, and others with underlying health conditions were given first priority. Many employers want to have their “essential workers” or all of their workers vaccinated as soon as possible.

During this webinar, Conn Maciel Carey’s OSHA and Labor & Employment attorneys discussed these important questions:

Continue reading →

Things Employers Should Consider as the $15 per hour Minimum Wage Gains Traction

Ashley D. Mitchell Leave a comment

The $15 per hour minimum wage is not a new idea, although a minimum wage increase under the Fair Labor Standards Act has garnered new attention in recent months. Raising the minimum wage was one of President Biden’s campaign promises and both the House and the Senate have re-introduced legislation to raise the federal minimum wage. Some states, like California, Connecticut, Illinois, and New York are already on track to have a $15 per hour minimum wage by 2025. But what does all this mean for employers? According to a recent Congressional Budget Office study increasing the federal minimum wage would raise the wages of at least 17 million Americans. Therefore, employers should begin thinking about how the progressive increase of the minimum wage will impact their resources.

The Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) dictates the federal minimum wage, rules surrounding overtime pay and hours worked, and recordkeeping requirements. Two types of employers are covered under the FLSA: enterprises and individuals. Enterprises have at least two employees and are (1) those that have an annual dollar volume of sales or business done of at least $500,000 or (2) hospitals and businesses providing medical or nursing care for residents, schools, and preschools, and government agencies. Individuals are employers whose employees are engaged in work that regularly involves interstate commerce. Executive, administrative, and professional employees (including teachers and academic administrative personnel in elementary and secondary schools) are FLSA minimum wage and overtime exempt provided they are paid at not less than $684 per week on a salary basis. These salary requirements do not apply to outside sales employees, teachers, and employees practicing law or medicine. This exception is commonly referred to as the white collar exception. Other minimum wage and overtime exemptions include creative professionals, computer employees, and highly compensated individuals.

If the $15 per hour minimum wage legislation passes, employers may consider making hourly employees who would otherwise be FLSA exempt salaried. There are several benefits to be gained if those employees were correctly classified as minimum wage and overtime exempt. First, predictable wages. Hourly employees who work more than 40 hours per week are entitled to 1.5 times their regular rate of pay for each additional hour worked. If the $15 per hour minimum wage passes, that would be an overtime rate of pay of $22.50 per hour. Salaried white collar employees are not subject to the same overtime pay. Second, the elimination of recordkeeping. Employers must keep a record of all hours worked by their hourly employees. For about the past year, many white collar employees have tele-worked due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Tele-work has made it challenging for employers to keep track of employee hours worked. Whereas before an employee may have used a daily timeclock located inside the office, now employers have had to come up with creative solutions to comply with the FLSA recordkeeping requirement. With many companies predicting that even after the pandemic tele-work may still be available at least one day a week for all white collar employees, correctly classifying white collar employees as exempt by making them salaried eliminates the need to keep track of employees’ working hours.

Employers who do consider changing their white collar employees from hourly to salaried should exercise caution. The U.S. Wage and Hour Division has outlined specific tests for every exempt employee category and employers do not want to run the risk of misclassifying employees as it could result in a lawsuit. Furthermore, employers should make sure that the decision is made equitably so as not to run afoul of other labor and employment laws like Title VII and The Americans with Disabilities Act. Ultimately, the decision of whether to make an otherwise FLSA exempt hourly employee salaried should take into account the employer’s resources and be made with the assistance of legal counsel.

[Webinar] What Employers Need to Know About COVID-19 Vaccines

Theresa Green Leave a comment

On Thursday, February 11th from 1:00 PM – 2:15 P.M. EST, join Kara M. Maciel, Fern Fleischer-Daves and Lindsay A. DiSalvo for a webinar regarding What Employers Need to Know About COVID-19 Vaccine.Capture

In December 2020, two COVID-19 vaccines received emergency use authorization from the US government and several more vaccines may be approved in the coming months. In the initial phases, front-line health care workers, nursing home residents, persons over 75 years of age, and others with underlying health conditions were given first priority. Many employers want to have their “essential workers” or all of their workers vaccinated as soon as possible.

During this webinar, Conn Maciel Carey’s OSHA and Labor & Employment attorneys will discuss these important questions:

Continue reading →

Union Elections In the Pandemic – How the NLRB is Moving Towards Mail Ballot Elections

Lindsay A. DiSalvo Leave a comment

COVID-19 has shifted the National Labor Relations Board’s (“NLRB”) longstanding policy that representation elections should generally be conducted manually.  In a recent example of COVID-19’s impact on representation elections, the Acting Regional Director for Region 10 issued a Decision and Direction of Election on January 15, 2020 requiring an election petitioned for by the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union (“the Union”) occur by mail-ballot because of the “undeniable presence of COVID-19 both inside and outside the Employer’s facility.”  The employer, Amazon.com Services LLC, requested a manual election – still the applicable presumption – while the Union requested an election by mail ballot.  In deciding that the election should take place by mail, the Regional Director cited guidance issued by the Centers for Disease Control related to general elections and guidance issued from the Office of the General Counsel as to what protocols should be used for a manual election during the pandemic.  But the most significant guidance the Regional Director relied on in mandating a mail-ballot election was the framework developed by the NLRB in the Aspirus Keweenaw case.

Framework Established by NLRB in Aspirus Keweenaw

In Aspirus Keweenaw, the NLRB reviewed a decision from the Regional Director for Region 18 that a mail-ballot election should occur at a hospital in Michigan over a manual ballot election because of “the extraordinary circumstances presented by the COVID-19 pandemic.”  The NLRB began its analysis by acknowledging that there is a presumption in favor of manual elections, particularly as statistics show that participation is generally higher for manual elections.  However, the NLRB recognized that its approach to elections must evolve based on the unique circumstances created by the COVID-19 pandemic and the need for more defined parameters as to when a mail-ballot election is appropriate based on changing pandemic conditions and in consideration of its preference for manual elections.  Specifically, the NLRB laid out six situations that will normally suggest a mail-ballot election:

  1. The Agency officer tasked with conducting the election is operating under “mandatory telework” status;
  2. Either the 14-day trend in the number of new confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the county where the facility is located is increasing or the 14-day testing positivity rate in the county where the facility is located is 5% or higher;
  3. The proposed manual election site cannot be established in a way that avoids violating mandatory state or local health orders relating to maximum gathering size;
  4. The employer fails or refuses to commit to abide by the GC Memo 20-10 protocols;
  5. There is a current COVID-19 outbreak at the facility or the employer refuses to disclose and certify its current status; or
  6. Other similarly compelling considerations.
Continue reading →

California’s CFRA Expansion Brings Increased Leave Rights

Megan Shaked Leave a comment

With the new year came a significant expansion of the California Family Rights Act (“CFRA”), which provides up to 12 weeks of unpaid, protected family and medical leave for certain employees. 

Under CFRA, specified employers are prohibited from refusing to grant certain leave requests by employees.  Employees granted a CFRA leave request must be guaranteed employment in the same or a comparable position upon termination of the leave.  CFRA also generally requires employers to maintain and pay for coverage under the employee’s group health plan for the duration of the leave at the level coverage would have been provided if the employee had continued working during the leave.

Under Senate Bill 1383, which went into effect January 1, 2021, private employers covered by CFRA now include any person who directly employs 5 or more employees.  Prior to this expansion, private employers covered by CFRA were only those with 50 or more employees. 

Qualifying Reasons For Leave

Qualified employees may be eligible for up to 12 workweeks of unpaid protected leave during any 12-month period:

1. for the birth of a child of the employee or placement of a child with an employee in connection with the adoption or foster care of the child by the employee;

2. for the employee’s own serious health condition that makes the employee unable to perform the functions of the position of that employee;

3. to care for certain family members who have a serious health condition;

4. due to a qualifying exigency related to the covered active duty or call to covered active duty of an employee’s spouse, domestic partner, child, or parent in the Armed Forces of the United States.

Covered family members used to include a spouse, domestic partner, parent, minor child, or dependent adult.  Now covered family members also include a child (not just minor child), grandparent, grandchild, and sibling.  Child, as defined, includes a biological, adopted, or foster child, a stepchild, a legal ward, a child of a domestic partner, or person to whom the employee stands in loco parentis.  This definition now includes adult children.  Parent, as defined, includes a biological, foster, or adoptive parent, a stepparent, a legal guardian, or other person who stood in loco parentis to the employee when the employee was a child.  A grandchild means a child of the employee’s child and a grandparent means a parent of the employee’s parent.  Sibling includes a person related to another person by blood, adoption, or affinity through a common legal or biological parent.

Given these expanded categories covered by CFRA, such leave may not always run concurrently with the Federal Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”).  Employers will want to carefully track all leave requests to properly comply with both the CFRA and FMLA.

You may also recall that California recently expanded its baby-bonding leave to smaller employers.  Specifically, California’s 2018 New Parent Leave Act (“NPLA”), provided for 12 workweeks of unpaid protected baby-bonding leave for employees working at a worksite in which the employer employs at least 20 employees within 75 miles.  The protections of the NPLA are now included within CFRA, and the separate NPLA has been repealed.

Eligibility for Leave

CFRA still requires an employee to have at least 1,250 hours of service with the employer during the previous 12-month period in order to qualify for leave.

Significantly, employees no longer need to be among 50 employees within 75 miles to qualify for leave; there is now no geographic limitation to eligibility for CFRA leave, so long as the employer has 5 or more employees.

The CFRA expansion also eliminated the so-called “key employee” exception.  Specifically, there is no longer an exception from complying with CFRA for an employee who is a salaried employee and is among the highest paid 10% of the employer’s employees. 

Finally, there is no longer an ability to split the total leave among two parents when both parents of a child are employed by the same employer.  Now, the total amount of leave would need to be granted to each such parent.  Employers can no longer require parents split the leave in any way.

A Note About Pregnancy Leave

Although the CFRA expansion touches on leave for baby-bonding, the legislation specifies that existing pregnancy, childbirth, and related medical condition leave provisions are separate and distinct protections from CFRA protections.  By definition, use of CFRA leave to care for an employee’s own serious health condition does not include any leave taken for disability on account of pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions.

Small Employer Family Leave Mediation Pilot Program

Under Government Code Section 12945.21, the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (“DFEH”), the state agency that enforces CFRA, is tasked with creating a small employer family leave mediation pilot program for employers with between 5 and 19 employees.  Under the pilot program, an employer may, within 30 days of receipt of a right-to-sue notice alleging a violation of CFRA, request all parties to participate in the DFEH’s dispute resolution division.  The DFEH is supposed to include in a right-to-sue notice information about the right to participate in the mediation pilot program.  If an employer or employee requests such mediation, the employee cannot file suit under CFRA until the mediation is complete.  An employee’s statute of limitations, including for all related claims not under CFRA, are tolled upon receipt of a request to participate in the DFEH’s dispute resolution division until mediation is complete.  Section 12945.21 remains in effect until January 1, 2024.

Next Steps for Employers

Now is a good time to revisit your handbooks, leave policies and training to make sure your company’s policies and procedures comply with the expanded CFRA requirements.  The DFEH has added updated facts sheets, required posters, and other leave-related information on its website.  We will also keep an eye on the CFRA regulations in effect.  Employers with questions about how to comply with the new requirements or how to navigate tricky leave questions are encouraged to consult with employment counsel.

*****

 
Conn Maciel Carey LLP
Disclaimer
Attorney Advertising

[Webinar] California Employment Law Update for 2021: New Legal Requirements and Practical Compliance Strategies Every HR Professional and Manager Should Know

Theresa Green Leave a comment

On Wednesday, January 20, 2021 at 10:00 AM PT / 1:00 PM ET, join Andrew J. Sommer and Megan S. Shaked for a webinar regarding California Employment Law Update for 2021: New Legal Requirements and Practical CaptureCompliance Strategies Every HR Professional and Manager Should Know.

2021 brings significant changes for California employers, from legislation and Cal/OSHA rulemaking associated with COVID-19 prevention to wage and hour developments. This webinar will review compliance obligations for companies doing business in California, as well as discuss the practical impact of these new laws and best practices for avoiding potential employment-related claims.

​Participants in this webinar will learn about:​ Continue reading →

President-Elect Biden Announces Boston Mayor Marty Walsh as his Choice for Secretary of Labor

Kara Maciel Leave a comment

By: Kara M. Maciel, Eric J. Conn, and Beeta B. Lashkari

On January 7, 2021, President-elect Joe Biden announced his much-awaited choice for nominee to serve as Secretary of Labor, selecting Boston Mayor Marty Walsh.  Mayor Walsh made his mark as a labor leader, ultimately heading the Building and Construction Trades Council from 2011 to 2013.   Mr. Walsh was also a full-time legislator, serving in the Massachusetts state legislature for some 17 years before being elected mayor in 2014.Picture1

If confirmed, it is expected that Mayor Walsh’s close personal friendship with President-elect Biden will elevate the importance of the Labor Department in President Biden’s cabinet, allowing a Secretary Walsh significant influence in the Administration.    

Mayor Walsh’s strong ties to organized labor and his selection follows through on President-elect Biden’s campaign promise to give unions a stronger voice in labor policy in his Administration. Mayor Walsh has a reputation as a “pragmatic dealmaker,” and he is respected in Massachusetts by both business and labor for his reasonable approach to solving labor and employment issues facing the state.

Of the many issues likely to be tackled by the Labor Department over the next few years, one of the first and most impactful will be the likely issuance of a federal COVID-19 Emergency Temporary Standard by OSHA.  President-elect Biden has pledged to have OSHA quickly address this issue.  If a federal ETS is promulgated, it would replace the current Administration’s approach, which has relied heavily on CDC and agency guidance, as well as existing OSHA standards, like the respiratory protection standard and recordkeeping rules, to issue citations.  With respect to COVID-19, under Mayor Walsh’s leadership, the City of Boston implemented a broad array of sector-specific workplace instructions for businesses designed to limit the spread of the virus, including requirements for face coverings, social distancing, building capacity limits, staggered work shifts, and worksite ventilation improvements.

As Labor secretary, Mr. Walsh would be responsible not just for worker protection standards, but also for renewed paid family-leave benefits and expanded access to unemployment insurance, among myriad other responsibilities.  Likewise, it is expected that DOL under a Biden Administration would rescind a just-finalized regulation issued over the appropriate test for classifying whether workers are independent contractors or employees. 

Republicans like House Education and Labor Committee Ranking Member Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) are already pushing back on President-elect Biden’s selection, warning that Mr. Walsh’s labor background signals that he will try to impose “punitive one-size-fits-all regulations” on employers.  Nonetheless, based on his track record, it is expected that Mr. Walsh may make efforts to force compromise between business and labor rather than taking a more ideological, anti-business approach that would likely have been followed had President-elect Biden nominated Senator Bernie Sanders as Labor Secretary, who is said to have wanted the post.  

While his selection awaits the Senate confirmation process, Mr. Walsh could be confirmed by a simple majority vote that would not require backing from a single Republican senator. 

Announcing Conn Maciel Carey’s 2021 Labor and Employment Webinar Series

Theresa Green Leave a comment

2021 Labor and Employment Webinar Series

The legal landscape facing employers seems as difficult to navigate as it has ever been.  Keeping track of the ever-changing patchwork of federal, state and local laws governing the workplace may often seem like a full-time job whether you are a human resources professional, in-house attorney or  business owner.  Change appears to be the one constant.  As President Trump’s Administration comes to an end, employers will continue to closely track the changes taking place at the NLRB, the DOL and the EEOC.  At the same time, a number of states will continue introducing new laws and regulations governing workplaces across the country, making it more important than ever for employers to pay attention to the bills pending in the legislatures of the states where they operate.  This complimentary webinar series will focus on a host of the most challenging and timely issues facing employers, examining past trends and looking ahead at the issues most likely to arise.

Conn Maciel Carey’s complimentary 2021 Labor and Employment Webinar Series, which includes (at least) monthly programs put on by attorneys in the firm’s national Labor and Employment Practice, is designed to give employers insight into legal labor and employment developments.

​To register for an individual webinar in the series, click on the link in the program description below. To register for the entire 2021 series, click here to send us an email request, and we will register you. If you missed any of our past programs from our annual Labor and Employment Webinar Series, click here to subscribe to our YouTube channel to access those webinars.

2021 Labor & Employment Webinar Series – Program Schedule

California Employment Law Update for 2021

Wednesday, January 20th
Marijuana, Drug Testing and Background Checks

Tuesday, July 13th
COVID-19 Vaccine: What Employers Need to Know

Thursday, February 11th
Employee Misconduct Defense & Employment Law

Wednesday, August 11th
Employment Law Update in D.C, MD, VA and Illinois

Wednesday, March 24th
Employee Handbooks, Training and Internal Audits

Tuesday, September 21st
Withdrawal Liability Pensions

Wednesday, April 14th
NLRB Update

Tuesday, October 19th
ADA Website Compliance Issues –  Best Strategies for Employers

Tuesday, May 18th
Avoiding Common Pitfalls: Non-Compete, Trade Secrets and More!

Wednesday, November 10th
What to Expect from DOL Under the Biden Admin.

Wednesday, June 16th
Recap of Year One of the Biden Administration

Tuesday, December 14th
   

See below for the full schedule with program descriptions, dates, times and links to register for each webinar event.

Continue reading →

Happy Holidays and Happy New Year from Conn Maciel Carey!

Theresa Green Leave a comment

From all of us here in the national Labor & Employment Practice Group at Conn Maciel Carey, to all of you, happy holidays and happy New Year.  We wish you a joyful and safe holiday season, and a 2021 that helps us all forget about this challenging year.

Please enjoy this holiday greeting from the CMC family to your family:

Despite this relentless year, we have so much to be thankful for at Conn Maciel Carey, but most of all, we thank you all for continuing to turn to us for counsel and legal services.  Please contact us if you have questions about any of the topics we have covered here on the Employer Defense Report blog, or if you have ideas for other subjects we should be covering.  And of course, contact any of us if there is ever anything our national Labor & Employment Practice Group at Conn Maciel Carey can do to help you or your company with Labor & Employment law issues.

[Client Alert] New California Employment Laws for 2021 Will Leave Their Mark

Theresa Green Leave a comment

By Andrew Sommer, Fred Walter, and Megan Shaked

2020 has been another banner year for California employment laws, with legislation and Cal/OSHA rulemaking associated with COVID-19 prevention and reporting taking center stage.  In our annual update of new employment laws impacting California private sector employers, we lead off with California’s COVID-19 related laws, given their far-reaching impact on the state’s workforce during the pandemic as employers continue to implement measures to prevent the spread of COVID-19 in the workplace.  We have also addressed other substantive legislative developments, particularly in the areas of wage and hour law and reporting of employee pay data.  Unless otherwise indicated, these new laws will take effect on January 1, 2021.

COVID-19 Related Rulemaking and Legislation

Temporary Emergency COVID-19 Prevention Rule Not to be outdone by Virginia OSHA, Oregon OSHA or Michigan OSHA, Cal/OSHA adopted an onerous COVID-19 specific temporary emergency regulation effective November 30, 2020.  Below is a detailed summary of how we got here, as well as an outline of what the rule requires.

On November 19, 2020, the California’s Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board (Standards Board) voted unanimously to adopt an Emergency COVID-19 Prevention Rule following a contentious public hearing with over 500 participants in attendance (albeit virtually).  The Emergency Rule was then presented to California’s Office of Administrative Law for approval and publication.  The Rule brings with it a combination of requirements overlapping with and duplicative of already-existing state and county requirements applicable to employers, as well as a number of new and, in some cases, very burdensome compliance obligations.

The Standards Board’s emergency rulemaking was triggered last May with the submission of a Petition for an emergency rulemaking filed by worker advocacy group WorkSafe and National Lawyers’ Guild, Labor & Employment Committee.  The Petition requested the Board amend Title 8 standards to create two new regulations Continue reading →