On June 10, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously ruled that state wage and hour laws do not apply to offshore drilling workers where federal law addresses the relevant issue. In Parker Drilling Management Services v. Newton, No. 18-389, the Supreme Court answered the question of whether California’s laws governing the minimum wage and payment for “standby time” applied to workers on oil rigs in federal waters off the coast of California.
On May 29, 2019, Assembly Bill No. 5 (AB 5) passed a California State Assembly floor vote and headed to the senate. The bill would codify the “ABC” test announced this past year by the Supreme Court of California.
On May 28, 2019, Governor Ned Lamont signed House Bill No. 5004 The bill, entitled “An Act Increasing the Minimum Fair Wage,” increases Connecticut’s minimum wage to $15.00 an hour over the next approximately four years.
In two recent companion cases, Andryeyeva v. New York Health Care, Inc. and Moreno v. Future Care Health Services, Inc., the New York Court of Appeals upheld the New York State Department of Labor’s (NYSDOL) 13-hour rule for the payment of home health aides working 24-hour shifts. Under this rule, an employer may pay home health aides for only 13 hours of a 24-hour shift if the aides receive at least 3 hours of meal break time and at least 8 hours of sleep (at least 5 of which must be uninterrupted).
On May 8, 2019, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) issued a unanimous opinion holding that salespeople who are paid solely on draws and commissions are entitled to separate and additional overtime and Sunday pay under Massachusetts law. The decision has far-reaching implications for most retailers, which have long relied on opinion letters from the Massachusetts Department of Labor Standards (DLS) suggesting that commissioned employees are not entitled to such additional compensation.
In what appears to be a first, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) has weighed in on the status of gig economy workers under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) in the form of an opinion letter.
After several years of failed attempts, the state of Washington passed a law on April 17, 2019 that will significantly limit the enforceability of noncompetition agreements under Washington law. Governor Jay Inslee has not yet signed the act into law, but it is expected that Governor Inslee will promptly do so.
On March 22, 2019, Governor Doug Ducey signed Arizona House Bill (HB) 2230 into law. As described in detail in our recent article, HB 2230 allows judgment creditors to serve writs of garnishment by certified mail, return receipt requested, in addition to traditional methods of service.
On April 1, 2019, the Department of Labor (DOL) announced that it will publish a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend its existing regulations regarding joint employment under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). This is no April Fools’ Day joke, as a joint employer is jointly and severally liable with the employer for all wages due to the employee under the FLSA.
On March 28, 2019, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) announced a proposed rule that would update and clarify regular rate requirements. Specifically, the proposed rule lists perks and benefits, such as unused paid leave and reimbursed expenses that employers can exclude when calculating an employee’s regular rate of pay. This article provides concise answers to employers’ frequently asked questions about the proposed rule.
On February 7, 2019, the Supreme Court of California issued its decision in Goonewardene v. ADP, LLC, holding that employees may not sue their employers’ payroll companies for wage claims in connection with their employment.
In part one of this series, we reported on several legislative developments in Minnesota that could impact employers. Now the Minnesota Legislature has proposed more bills affecting the workplace. These bills could alter the standard for sexual harassment, preempt local wage and sick leave laws, prohibit discrimination against unemployed job applicants, change the definition of “wage theft,” and further gender equality legislation.
Last year, a Wisconsin court of appeals held that it was unsettled under Wisconsin law whether employers may be required to pay employees for time spent driving between home and work in company vans if the vans are also transporting work tools and equipment.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit recently held that a group of directional driller consultants were independent contractors, not employees, in large part due to their highly specialized skills, degree of control over their own projects, and ability to control their profits and analyzed losses.
Slightly more than two weeks after it announced its notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to revise the part 541 overtime exemption regulations, the U.S. Department of Labor’s (DOL) Wage and Hour Division (WHD) published the NPRM in the Federal Register (84 Fed. Reg. 10900) on March 22, 2019.
On March 14, 2019, the Wage and Hour Division (WHD) of the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) issued two new opinion letters addressing compliance under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).
In November 2017, the New York State Department of Labor (NYSDOL) issued a proposed predictive scheduling rule that would have imposed various call-in pay requirements when shifts are scheduled or cancelled on short notice or when employees are on call.
On March 7, 2019, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) Wage and Hour Division (WHD) announced the release of its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to revise the regulations defining who is an executive, administrative, professional, outside sales and computer employee exempt from the overtime and minimum wage protections of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).
On March 7, 2019, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) unveiled its new overtime proposal in a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), which would update the salary thresholds according to which workers are entitled to overtime compensation.
In March 2010, as part of the passage of the Affordable Care Act, the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) was amended to require most employers to provide nonexempt employees “reasonable break time for an employee to express breast milk for her nursing child for 1 year after the child’s birth each time such employee has need to express the milk”; and “a place, other than a bathroom, that is shielded from view and free from intrusion from coworkers and the public, which may be used by an employee to express breast milk.”
On February 14, 2019, the Illinois legislature passed Senate Bill 0001 (SB0001), which amends the Illinois Minimum Wage Law and the Illinois Income Tax Act.
In a ruling that will have a significant impact on the retail and restaurant industries, among others in California, the California Court of Appeal ruled that a retail employer’s call-in scheduling policy—in which employees were required to call the employer in advance of a shift to find out if they needed to show up for
New Jersey has joined the ranks of California, Massachusetts, New York, and the District of Columbia in requiring a phased increase of the minimum wage to $15 an hour as a result of a bill (A-15/S-15) signed into law by Governor Phil Murphy on Monday, February 4, 2019.
The Arizona Court of Appeals, Division One, has ruled that the Arizona State Legislature overstepped its authority in 2016, when it prohibited Arizona cities and other municipalities from enacting their own employee benefits ordinances.
Last week, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Mendoza v. Fonseca McElroy Grinding Co., Inc., et al., No. 17-15221 (January 15, 2019), requested that the California Supreme Court decide the following question: Is operating engineers’ offsite “mobilization work”—including the transportation to and from a public works site of roadwork grinding equipment—performed “in the execution of [a] contract for public work,” Cal. Lab. Code § 1772, such that it entitles workers to “not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for work of a similar character in the locality in which the public work is performed” pursuant to section 1771 of the California Labor Code?
The U.S. Department of Labor’s (DOL) Wage and Hour Division (WHD) officially sent its notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to revise the Part 541 regulations to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review.
On January 15, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) did not apply to wage claims brought by an interstate truck driver, even though the plaintiff was classified as an independent contractor.
Two competing bills related to the classification of workers are in play in the California legislature.
On January 9, 2019, Mexico’s National Institute of Statistics and Geography issued an official press release regarding the daily, monthly, and annual value of the Unit of Measure and Update (UMA) that will become effective on February 1, 2019.
Although the Washington State Department of Labor and Industries (L&I) has yet to finalize the new annual salary required for exempt status, it intends to propose a new salary basis test that would more than double the current federal salary threshold.