By Tod C. Gurney | Published April 1, 2020 | Posted in Employee Rights, Employment Issues, Employment Law | Tagged Tags: COVID-19, FFCRA, FMLA, Layoffs, paid sick leave |
New Round of Guidance on the Families First Coronavirus Response Act
New Round of Guidance on the Families First Coronavirus Response Act As explained in our prior blogs (see Families First Coronavirus Response Act – What We Know and Additional Guidance on the Families First Coronavirus Response Act), Congress has created two new forms of paid leave benefits that will go into effect on April 1, Read More
Read MoreAdditional Guidance on the Family First Coronavirus Response Act
Additional Guidance on the Family First Coronavirus Response Act Last week, we wrote about the passage of the Family First Coronavirus Response Act (“FFCRA”). As mentioned in that piece, the FFCRA stated that various federal agencies would be issuing additional guidelines as a means of clarifying the new, sweeping law. On Tuesday, March 24, 2020, the Read More
Read MoreCal-WARN Suspended: Guidance For Employers
Cal-WARN Suspended: Guidance For Employers Due to Executive Order N-33-20 (“Stay At Home Order”) and the economic downturn caused by COVID-19, many businesses are being forced to close or lay off workers. When either occurs, employers must give careful attention to notice obligations under the federal WARN Act (“WARN”) and its state equivalent, Cal-WARN. WARN Read More
Read MoreNew Privacy Rights Are On the Way: What Your Marketing and Human Resources Departments Need to Know
New Privacy Rights are on the Way: What Your Marketing and Human Resources Departments Need to Know Teaser: The California Consumer Protection Act (CCPA) becomes effective January 1, 2020. Failure to comply with this Act risks regulatory and private action including fines of $2,500 per violation. The Act defines a consumer as a California resident, Read More
Read MoreWhether Continued Employment is Acceptance of an Arbitration Agreement?
Whether Continued Employment is Acceptance of an Arbitration Agreement? When a California employer changes its policies to include mandatory arbitration, does an employee’s continued employment after notification that an agreement to arbitration is a condition of continued employment, maintain that the employee has impliedly consented to the arbitration agreement? In Diaz v. Sohnen Enterprises, this Read More
Read MoreWhy Should I Care About The Dynamex Decision?
Why Should I Care About The Dynamex Decision? Many California business owners have used independent contractors in an effort to grow their businesses and keep cost down. Many businesses have used independent contractor arrangements in an effort to “retire” an employee such that the former employee will provide consulting agreements. On April 30, 2018, the Read More
Read MoreEmployees Must Be Paid for Work Off the Clock
On Thursday, July 26, 2018, the Supreme Court of California issued its ruling in Troester v. Starbucks Corporation, No. S234969, 2018 WL 3582702, which held that California employees must be paid for all hours worked “off the clock,” including small time periods, which is a deviation from the federal law’s employer-friendly “de minimis” rule. What Read More
Read MoreEmployers Can (in Certain Situations) Legally Impose On-Premises Meal Periods
Since Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior Court, California employers have taken great strides in ensuring its employees are provided their daily meal and rest breaks and some California employers have learned the hard way that failure to provide such breaks can expose them to costly penalties and damages. A win for employers came recently when Read More
Read MoreHow to respond to a government audit of your employment records
You may have seen the recent headlines about Google – they successful fought a request by the federal government, Office of Federal Contract Compliance Program (“OFCCP”), for the contact information for 25,000 employees! The OFCCP audits federal government contractors to ensure compliance with federal discrimination laws. As a federal government contractor, Google spent $500,000 (for Read More
Read MoreCalifornia Employers Must Pay Commissioned Employees for Rest Breaks
Earlier this year, a California Court of Appeals held in Vaquero v. Stoneledge Furniture LLC that an employer violated state law by not paying commissioned employees for their rest breaks. Under state law, employees must be provided with paid 10-minute rest breaks for every four hours of work, or fraction thereof. In Vaquero, the employer operated Read More
Read More
