LEAVES OF ABSENCE AND BENEFITS
- Paid Family Leave
- Lactation Accommodation
HIRING PRACTICES
- Salary History
- Criminal Background Checks
DISCRIMINATION, HARASSMENT AND RETALIATION PROTECTIONS
- Harassment – Defamation Protection
- Confidentiality Clauses in Settlement Agreements
- Sexual Harassment
- Sexual Harassment Training
- Waivers of Right to Testify
- Gender Representation on Boards of Directors
- Discrimination Against Service Members
- Sexual Harassment – Professional Relationship
- Legislative Employees – Whistleblower Protection
- New Human Trafficking Training
WAGE AND HOUR
- Construction Industry PAGA Prohibition
- Petroleum Facility Rest Break Exception
- Meal Period Exception for Feed Truck Drivers
- Copies of Payroll Records
WORKPLACE HEALTH/SAFETY AND WORKERS’ COMPENSATION
- Injury Reporting – Statute of Limitations
- Workplace Mental Health – Voluntary Standards
LIABILITY
Joint Liability – Port Trucking Companies
Labor-Related Liabilities – Direct Contractor
For any questions regarding these new laws, or existing laws, contact the Employment and Labor Law Attorneys at SBEMP (Slovak, Baron, Empey, Murphy & Pinkney) by clicking here.
SBEMP LLP is a full service law firm with attorney offices in Palm Springs (Palm Desert, Inland Empire, Rancho Mirage), CA; Costa Mesa (Orange County), CA; San Diego, CA; New Jersey, NJ; and New York, NY.
DISCLAIMER: This blog post does not constitute legal advice, and no attorney-client relationship is formed by reading it. This blog post may be considered ATTORNEY ADVERTISING in some states. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Additional facts or future developments may affect subjects contained within this blog post. Before acting or relying upon any information within this newsletter, seek the advice of an attorney.
Photo: License: Creative Commons 3 – CC BY-SA 3.0; Attribution: Alpha Stock Images – http://alphastockimages.com/; Original Author: Nick Youngson – http://www.nyphotographic.com/; Original Image: http://picpedia.org/handwriting/e/employment-law.html
New California Employment Laws
January 2019 will bring several new employment laws that will affect your business. On Governor Jerry Brown’s last day to sign or veto bills, he signed the following into law:
- AB 1976 – Lactation Accommodation: employers cannot designate a bathroom as a space to express breast milk.
- AB 2282 – Salary History: employers cannot ask about salary history but can now inquire about an applicant’s salary expectations for the position the applicant is applying for; external applicants are entitled to a pay scale upon request, after completing an initial interview.
- AB 2770 – Defamation Protection: employees who make a credible report of harassment and employers who communicate with interested parties during an investigation will be shielded from liability in a defamation lawsuit.
- SB 820 – Confidentiality Clauses in Settlement Agreements: settlement agreements in matters where sexual harassment, assault or discrimination have been alleged are prohibited from including a confidentiality provision that prohibits the disclosure of factual information regarding the claim.
- SB 1123 – Paid Family Leave: the wage replacement program will be expanded in 2021 to any employee who takes time off for qualifying exigencies related to the covered active duty status of the employee’s spouse, domestic partner, child or parent.
- SB 1300 – Sexual Harassment: this law lowers the bar for employees to initiate harassment lawsuits and the ability of employers to obtain summary judgment in those matters by, among other things, specifically affirming or rejecting prior employer-friendly judicial holdings, such as rejecting the “stray remark doctrine” and prohibiting employers’ reliance on Kelly v. Conco for the proposition that different standards of hostile work environment may apply, depending on the type of workplace involved.
- SB 1343 – Sexual Harassment Training: starting in 2020, employers with five or more employees will be required to provide two hours of sexual harassment training to supervisors, and one hour to non-supervisor employees within six months of hiring/promotion, and every two years after that.
For any questions regarding these new laws, or existing laws, contact the Employment and Labor Law Attorneys at SBEMP.
For more information or to request a consultation please contact the law offices of SBEMP (Slovak, Baron, Empey, Murphy & Pinkney) by clicking here.
SBEMP LLP is a full service law firm with attorney offices in Palm Springs (Palm Desert, Inland Empire, Rancho Mirage), CA; Costa Mesa (Orange County), CA; San Diego, CA; Princeston, NJ; and New York, NY.
DISCLAIMER: This blog post does not constitute legal advice, and no attorney-client relationship is formed by reading it. This blog post may be considered ATTORNEY ADVERTISING in some states. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Additional facts or future developments may affect subjects contained within this blog post. Before acting or relying upon any information within this newsletter, seek the advice of an attorney.
A recent decision by the California Court of Appeal confirmed that the ABC test, used to determine whether an individual shall be classified as an employee or an independent contractor, will only be applied to claims involving Industrial Welfare Commission wage order violations.
Earlier this year, the California Supreme Court in Dynamex v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County held that in order to classify a worker as an independent contractor, the person or business who hires the worker must prove all three of the following factors:
(A) that the worker is free from the control and direction of the hiring entity in connection with the performance of the work, both under the contract for the performance of the work and in fact;
(B) that the worker performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity’s business; and
(C) that the worker is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, or business of the same nature as the work performed.
This test, referred to as the “ABC Test”, presumes that any worker is an employee and places the burden on the hiring entity to demonstrate otherwise. However, after Dynamex, uncertainty remained regarding whether the new test would apply to non-wage-order claims.
On October 22, 2018, the Court of Appeal in Garcia v. Border Transportation Group, LLC held that the ABC Test applies only to claims arising out of alleged violations of the wage orders, and the Borello test will continue to be applied to all non-wage order claims.
It is important for both workers and businesses to know whether an individual worker should properly be classified as an employee or an independent contractor, and equally important to understand the correct application of the ABC Test. SBEMP’s Labor & Employment Department is prepared to guide you through the process.
For more information or to request a consultation please contact the law offices of SBEMP (Slovak, Baron, Empey, Murphy & Pinkney) by clicking here.
SBEMP LLP is a full service law firm with attorney offices in Palm Springs (Palm Desert, Inland Empire, Rancho Mirage), CA; Costa Mesa (Orange County), CA; San Diego, CA; Princeston, NJ; and New York, NY.
DISCLAIMER: This blog post does not constitute legal advice, and no attorney-client relationship is formed by reading it. This blog post may be considered ATTORNEY ADVERTISING in some states. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Additional facts or future developments may affect subjects contained within this blog post. Before acting or relying upon any information within this newsletter, seek the advice of an attorney.
The U. S. Supreme Court upheld the practice some companies have of requiring employees to sign away their rights to bring about class action law suits against management concerning hours or wages. This ruling allows management to compel employees to sign away their rights to join forces against management.
In a victory for American employers, the United States Supreme Court has just ruled that class action waivers in arbitration agreements required as a condition of employment do not violate the National Labor Relations Act, the 1930s law that applies to all base level employees, even absent a union.
Most private California employers will now be able to require as a condition of employment that employees agree in advance to arbitrate employment disputes. A well-crafted arbitration agreement developed with the help of experienced employment counsel familiar with this case presents the possibility of reducing the time, expense, disruption to your business, and potential negative publicity of litigating class action employment disputes in court. As well, it eliminates exposure to a runaway jury verdict.
The case is Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis, Ernst & Young LLP v. Morris, and NLRB v. Murphy Oil USA, Inc.
JULY 1: NEW NATIONAL ORIGIN REGULATIONS
REMINDER: California has approved new regulations addressing national origin protections for applicants and employees, including individuals who are undocumented. Even though California already has strict rules prohibiting harassment and discrimination based on protected classes, including national origin, California has approved new regulations which expand on those rules. These new regulations also reiterate the Fair Employment and Housing Act’s prohibitions against harassment and retaliation based on national origin.
Should you have any questions regarding the new regulations, contact the Employment and Labor attorneys at SBEMP.
NEW RULES SET FOR DETERMINING
EMPLOYEE VERSUS CONTRACTOR
In a decision likely to make it much harder for businesses to classify workers as contractors, the California Supreme Court has set aside a multi-factor standard California courts used for 30 years to determine whether a worker was an independent contractor or an employee under California’s various Wage Orders.
The Court ruled on April 30th in Dynamex Operations West v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County that from now on businesses must use a three-factor, or ABC, test when making that determination. The test presumes the worker is an employee and not an independent contractor unless each of three conditions is satisfied.
For additional information, contact our office or continue reading on SBEMP Facebook Page.
Employment & Labor Law Attorneys of SBEMP
 |
 |
 |
| Thomas S. Slovak | Lena D. Wade | Vee B. Sotelo |
SBEMP’S Labor and Employment Department is comprised of attorneys with decades of experience in a broad range of labor and employment matters from day-to-day counseling to labor negotiations and litigation. Our team is prepared to guide our clients through the complex myriad of employment laws affecting California employers. We assist our clients with day-to-day personnel management issues, such as drafting employment policies, managing leaves of absence, identifying potential problems in hiring and firing practices, and ensuring wage and hour compliance. Our attorneys are also experienced litigators who regularly represent clients in all types of employment litigation, including defending wage and hour class actions as well as lawsuits alleging discrimination, harassment, and retaliation. Additionally, we regularly represent clients in administrative proceedings, such as Labor Commissioner claims, CalOSHA citations, DFEH and EEOC investigations, and DLSE complaints. Our labor and employment practice is also prepared to assist clients with labor negotiations and disputes. Our labor attorneys are experienced in negotiating labor agreements as well as representing clients before the NLRB.
DISCLAIMER: This blog post does not constitute legal advice, and no attorney-client relationship is formed by reading it. This blog post may be considered ATTORNEY ADVERTISING in some states. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Additional facts or future developments may affect subjects contained within this blog post. Before acting or relying upon any information within this newsletter, seek the advice of an attorney.
Understanding Employment Litigation
When it comes to employment litigation, it is not always about whether the employer feels the employee has been treated fairly. The employers’ view of fairness can be very different from the employee or the law. Most employers are caught off guard in litigation by an employee they thought was treated correctly. When this happens, it is important for the employer to fully understand the complex process of employment litigation to try and avoid trial or keep losses to a minimum. The article below will discuss the common steps in the litigation process.
Regulatory Agency Review
Most employment litigation will begin in either the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission(EEOC), Employment Security Commission(ESC) or the Department of Labor(DOL). During this phase investigators or attorneys work to build a case for the employee.
Filing Complaint
If an agency or the employee decides to file a lawsuit, usually it must be done within a short-specified time frame, often in as little as 90 days. Once served by the employee, the employer must decide how to respond.
Interrogatories
This step is when both sides present the opportunity to ask each other questions to expose what each side knows in relation to the case.
Mandatory Mediation
This stage involves a mediator that attempts to settle the suit prior to avoid trial.
Summary Judgment
This is the last step before trial where either side attempts to persuade the judge on why the case shouldn’t go to trial.
The employment litigation process is very complex and should be handled by professionals that understand these cases. If you are an employer facing litigation, don’t hesitate to contact our Palm Springs employment law attorney today.
Palm Springs, CA – In a decision likely to make it much harder for businesses to classify workers as contractors, the California Supreme Court has set aside a multi-factor standard, which California courts used for 30 years to determine whether a worker was an independent contractor or an employee under the state’s various Wage Orders. (more…)
From the Labor & Employment Department:
Beginning July 1, 2018, Cal/OSHA will start enforcing an ergonomic standard to protect hotel lodging industry housekeepers from musculoskeletal injuries.
The headlines in 2017 involved emerging headlines showing litigation and sexual harassment claims. In 2018, there is no indication of these headlines slowing down. The boost in sexual-harassment claims coincides with the prevalent and ongoing social movement which has supported those who are victims of sexual harassment to step forward and announce that they, also, have been victimized.
From the Labor & Employment Department:
2018 Brings Changes to California’s Labor and Employment Laws – Part Three of a Three Part Series
Wage and Hour: (more…)