We are continuing to monitor developing issues facing employers due to the outbreak of COVID-19.  The latest is from Congress.

On March 13, the US House of Representatives passed the Families First Coronavirus Response Act, (the “Act”) to  provide for emergency paid sick and family and medical leave for some employees around the country.  Public agencies and employers with fewer than 500 employees are covered by the Act, and can apply for tax credits each quarter to recoup payments made under the Act.

Please note that the Act has not gone into effect yet and is not final.  The Senate must also pass the Act before it becomes effective, and the Senate is likely to make changes.  Subject to those changes, below is a summary of the important items for employers to know about the Act in its current state.

Emergency Family and Medical Leave

Employees are eligible for up to 12 weeks of paid family and medical leave under the Act if they have worked for an employer for at least 30 days, and are absent from work for one of the following reasons:
Continue Reading House of Representatives Takes Steps to Provide Paid Leave to Employees Absent due to COVID-19; Senate Must Still Act

We continue to stay up to speed on workplace-related legal issues as we all navigate this challenging time. Many of you attended the webinar we put on today, Taming the COVID-19 Chaos: What Employers Need to Know.  The materials from that presentation are available here.  Please join us for another webinar next Wednesday, March…

Washington Health Benefit Exchange Announces Special Enrollment Period

Today, the IRS issued Notice 2020-15 clarifying that high-deductible health plans (HDHPs) may provide benefits associated with testing and treatment of COVID-19 (commonly referred to as coronavirus) without application of a deductible or cost-sharing. Doing so will not impact a plan’s status as a HDHP or a…

No sooner has Washington enacted two major new leave laws – the Washington Paid Sick Leave Law and the Washington Paid Family and Medical Leave Law (WPFML) – than the State has found itself to be one of the epicenters of the COVID-19 outbreak.  Here is what Washington employers need to know about Paid Sick…

With COVID-19 (coronavirus) impacting communities in the Northwest and around the U.S. and world, employers are wondering what role they can play in keeping their employees safe and healthy. Don’t panic! Your current policies and practices are probably sufficient to handle any issues that may affect your workplace. But here are some general recommendations. (See…

With hourly reports of a possible coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic in the news, employers are confronted with preparing for widespread employee absences or a pandemic situation.  Among many issues to consider is how to treat absences related to coronavirus.  Not only must employers consider how to treat employees who themselves become ill, they must also prepare for those who will be absent to care for others, as well as possible illness-related furloughs or facility closures.

Under the FLSA and most state wage and hour laws, there is a distinction between how employees are treated, depending upon their status as exempt or non-exempt employees.

Non-exempt employees.  Employers should pay non-exempt employees for all time worked but are not required to pay them if they do not perform work.   For example, if the non-exempt employee performs work from home, they should be paid for all time actually worked.  On the other hand, the employer need not pay non-exempt employees if they perform no work because, for example, the employer closes its facility (1) because of an epidemic, (2) to prevent the spread of disease, or (3) for lack of work.
Continue Reading Pay, Leave, and Scheduling Issues Due to the Coronavirus (COVID-19)

Through a series of decisions issued in late 2019, the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB” or “Board”) has signaled a return to common sense in its approach to the rules governing labor relations.  Here are a few of the Board’s decisions that are of interest to employers.

Employers May Require Employees to Maintain Confidentiality in…

By Coolcaesar, CC BY-SA 3.0, Link

In Amanda Frlekin v. Apple Inc., No. S243805 (Feb. 13, 2020), the California Supreme Court responded to a request by the United States Court of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit to answer the following question:

Is time spent on the employer’s premises waiting for, and undergoing, required exit searches of packages, bags, or personal technology devices voluntarily brought to work purely for personal convenience by employees compensable as “hours worked” within the meaning of [California law]?

The Supreme Court answered the question and, so as not to bury the lead, the answer is an emphatic YES.
Continue Reading California Supreme Court Clarifies What Constitutes “Hours Worked” Under California Law

Assembly Bill 51 (“AB 51”) prohibits employers from requiring employees to execute arbitration agreements as a condition of employment.  After being signed by California Governor Gavin Newsom on October 10, 2019, AB 51 was set to go into effect on January 1, 2020; however, on December 30, 2019, the Honorable Kimberly J. Mueller, Chief Judge…

Employees at work

From the California Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Dynamex to the passage of dozens of new employment laws, 2019 was an important year for California employers.  While some of these new laws were discussed here, this blog discusses some additional laws (there are a lot) and provides some updates on legal challenges to AB 5 and AB 51.

  • Pursuant to previously enacted laws, on January 1, 2020 California’s annual minimum wage increased to $13 per hour ($12 per hour for employees with 25 or fewer employees).
  • SB 778 clarifies California employers’ duties to provide harassment training to employees. Pursuant to previously enacted SB 1343, employers had a duty to provide harassment training to both supervisory and nonsupervisory employees once every two years.  SB 778 extends the initial deadline for providing new training to employees from January 1, 2020 to January 1, 2021.  It also clarifies that employees who completed harassment training in 2019 do not need to retrained for another two years and then every two years thereafter.

Continue Reading 2019: A Year to Forget for California Employers