We have been counseling employers throughout the COVID-19 pandemic and have encountered several common scenarios.  Many of the most frequently asked questions are addressed in our Employer FAQs.  This post provides additional information on the interaction between various pandemic-related issues and the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”).

  1. An employee known to be suffering from

…

For at least the next two months, Washington employers are required to take extra measures to accommodate employees characterized by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to be at higher than normal risk of severe illness or death if they contract COVID-19.  On April 13, Governor Inslee issued Proclamation 20-46, “High-Risk Employees – Workers’ Rights,” prohibiting all Washington employers, both public and private, from failing to provide accommodations to high-risk workers, defined by the CDC as:

  • Employees age 65 or older
  • Employees with serious underlying health conditions, including:
    • Moderate to severe asthma
    • Heart disease
    • Lung disease
    • Diabetes
    • Chronic kidney disease, undergoing dialysis
    • Liver disease
    • Severe obesity
    • A condition that renders the employee immunocompromised, such as HIV or cancer treatment.

Employees in the above high-risk categories are now afforded additional accommodation rights under the Governor’s Proclamation.  Between now and June 12 (subject to extension by the Governor), you must take the following steps if you are a Washington employer:
Continue Reading Washington Governor Mandates That Employers Accommodate Employees at High Risk of Contracting COVID-19

California is like every other state in that it does not require employers to provide employees with paid time off.  Unlike in most other states, however, if an employer does provide employees with paid time off, then employees have a vested right in such time.  What this means is that employers are prohibited from enacting “use it or lose it” paid time off policies.  It also means that upon separation, California employers must pay out employees for any unused paid time off.

Due to these requirements, and to remain competitive with other employers, some employers have instituted “unlimited” paid time off policies whereby employees do not accrue any specific amount of vacation time but, rather, are free to take (or not take) as much (or as little) vacation as they want.  The commonly held belief amongst most employers is that such unlimited paid time off policies benefit employees by providing them with flexible schedules while, at the same time, allowing employers to avoid the obligation to pay out any unused paid time off upon separation.  In McPherson v. EF Intercultural Foundation (McPherson), the California Court of Appeal issued a shot across the bow to employers adhering to this commonly held belief by holding that the unlimited paid time off policy at issue did obligate the employer to pay out unused paid time off upon termination.
Continue Reading California Court of Appeal Issues Warning to Employers with Unlimited Paid Time Off Policies

On April 1, 2020, the U.S. Department of Labor (“DOL”) issued regulations for the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (“FFCRA”), which went into effect the same day.  The regulations are available here.

The majority of the content in the regulations is not new and simply repeats information that is also available in the DOL’s FAQs guidance (which has been updated several times since it was first posted).  The DOL’s FAQs are here, and our blog post highlighting key takeaways from the FAQs as initially posted is here.

The latest information for employers from the regulations and the updated FAQs includes:

Clarification of small business exemption.

  • Employers with fewer than 50 employees may assert they are exempt from providing emergency paid medical leave (“EPML”) or emergency paid sick leave (“EPSL”) to employees who miss work due to a school or childcare closure. (Note that there are numerous qualifying reasons to use EPSL, including when an employee has been advised to self-quarantine or is showing symptoms consistent with COVID-19 and seeking a medical diagnosis.  However, there is no exemption that will allow small employers to avoid providing EPSL altogether.)
  • To deny an employee EPML or EPSL as outlined above, an “authorized officer” of the small employer must determine that:
    • providing such leave would cause the employer’s expenses and financial obligations to exceed available business revenue and cause the employer to cease operating at a minimal capacity;
    • the absence of the employee(s) requesting such leave would pose a substantial risk to the financial health or operational capacity of the employer because of their specialized skills, knowledge of the business, or responsibilities; or
    • the employer cannot find enough other workers who are able, willing, and qualified, and who will be available at the time and place needed, to perform the labor or services that the employee(s) requesting leave provide, and these labor or services are needed for the employer to operate at a minimal capacity.
  • Small employers are not required to formally “apply” for the exemption; rather, they must “document the facts and circumstances . . . justify[ing] [the] denial” of leave. The small business exemption does not require prior approval from the DOL, and neither the FFCRA nor the regulations create an express right for employees to challenge the employer’s determination that it qualifies.  Thus, it would appear that small employers have a great deal of discretion to determine whether they qualify for the exemption.
  • Small employers who assert the exemption must still post the FFCRA notice to employees.

Use of employer-provided paid time off during EPML.  After the first two workweeks of EPML, employers can require that employees take EPML concurrently with any employer-provided paid time off (such as vacation or personal leave) that would otherwise be available for employees to care for their children under the employer’s policies during their absence.  Employees can also elect to use employer-provided paid time off concurrently.  During the first two workweeks of EPML, employees may elect to use their employer-provided paid leave or EPSL, but the employer may not require them to do so.
Continue Reading Department of Labor Issues Regulations and Updates Guidance for Families First Coronavirus Response Act

Current Oregon law grants two important rights to manufacturing employees: (1) they are entitled to overtime pay if they work more than 10 hours in a single work day (and can never work more than 13 hours in a day); and (2) they may not work more than 55 hours in a workweek unless they provide their written consent to work up to a maximum of 60 hours.  In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries (“BOLI”) has adopted a new emergency rule that allows manufacturing employers to seek a partial exemption from these requirements as described below.

Under BOLI’s new rule, employers engaged in manufacturing products that “reasonably result in the preservation of life and property” during the coronavirus pandemic may seek the exemption.  (BOLI has also issued a FAQ to help employers determine whether they are making such products, among other guidance.)

Here is what BOLI had to say about what kinds of manufactured product will support the exemption:

“Manufacturers that are part of the supply chain for food or medical equipment and have seen increased demand during the pandemic are great examples. For example, garment factories producing medical personal protective equipment (PPE), scrubs, or gowns may be included, whereas a regular clothing manufacturer may not.”
Continue Reading UPDATED: BOLI Issues New Rule Providing for Emergency Exemption from Manufacturing Hours Limits

In the wake of an onslaught of employee complaints about social distancing in the workplace, the Oregon Occupational Health and Safety Administration (“OR-OSHA”) announced that it would begin workplace inspections in order to enforce the social distancing requirements imposed by Governor Brown’s March 23 Executive Order.  Our blog post describing the Executive Order is here, a link to a media article about OR-OSHA’s announcement is here, and a link to OR-OSHA resources regarding workplace safety during the COVID 19 pandemic is here.

Here are some general guidelines to keep in mind if OR-OSHA conducts an inspection at your workplace:

  • OR-OSHA has the legal authority to inspect workplaces for compliance with safety standards, with or without notice. This includes the right to enter the workplace “during working hours or at other reasonable times, within reasonable limits, and in a reasonable manner.”  What is “reasonable” will depend on the circumstances, but in general it means that investigators may access your facility during regular business hours and may inspect portions of the facility as much as necessary to determine whether sound safety practices are being followed.
  • The OR-OSHA investigator will generally begin the inspection by holding a short conference with the employer’s representative. This is why it is important now to plan ahead and designate your representative(s), who may or may not be the same individual(s) who are enforcing social distancing compliance with Governor Brown’s Executive Order, and prepare them for how to cooperate with OR-OSHA.  During the conference the investigator will present his/her credentials and explain the purpose and scope of the visit, request any records he/she intends to review, determine whether any personal protective equipment is necessary while touring the facility, and inform the employer of OR-OSHA’s right to speak to employees and take photographs or conduct sampling.
  • The employer is entitled to have a representative accompany the investigator during the inspection. Inspectors have the right to question employees confidentially without management representatives present.
  • At the conclusion of the inspection, the investigator will conduct a closing conference to discuss his/her findings and advise the employer of any violations and safety hazards that have been identified. The investigator will also discuss OR-OSHA’s remediation and enforcement plan, including items like timelines for correcting any hazards, possible penalties, and the employer’s appeal rights.

Continue Reading OR-OSHA Announces Workplace Social Distancing Investigations

*a prior version of this post indicated the House vote was still pending. The House passed this legislation on March 27, 2020. 

Like you, we are closely monitoring the rapid developments caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. The latest is Congress passing the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (or “CARES” Act). We focus below on the employment-related provisions of the Act, but encourage you to continue checking our COVID-19 Resource Hub for additional updates on other aspects of the Act.

Direct Payments to Individuals 

Under the Act, direct payments of $1,200 will be made to single individuals who earn $75,000 or less in adjusted gross income, and $2,400 to married couples who earn $150,000 or less in adjusted gross income, according to their 2018 tax returns or 2019 tax return if already filed.  There will be an additional $500 payment per child.  These payments scale down as income increases, phasing out entirely for individuals earning $99,000 and joint filers without children earning $198,000.

Increased Unemployment Benefits 

The Act also provides assistance to states to administer and expand unemployment benefits. 
Continue Reading UPDATE: Congress Passes Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act

At the direction of Governor Brad Little, the Director of the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare has issued an Order to Self-Isolate for the State of Idaho that became effective on March 25, 2020.  The Order is intended to respond to the ongoing COVID-19 public health emergency by ensuring the maximum number of people…