Employers operating in Ontario, Canada should be aware that Ontario’s minimum wage rate is set to increase on October 1, 2020. This increase affects not only the general minimum wage rate, but also the alternative minimum wage rates that apply in Ontario.
We previously reported on COVID-19–related employment lawsuits that we tracked from late March 2020 through early May 2020. Since then, the number of lawsuits has steadily risen as employers have resumed operations after shelter-in-place or stay-at-home orders were lifted and students returned to school in virtual or hybrid environments. To track this litigation and to identify trends, we developed an Interactive COVID-19 Litigation Tracker that details where COVID-19–related litigation is taking place by state, the industries affected, and the types of claims asserted against employers and educational institutions.
On September 8, 2020, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York vacated the U.S. Department of Labor’s (DOL) final joint-employer rule, which limited when multiple businesses involved in an employment relationship could be liable for violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).
The countdown is on for when Maine officially becomes the first state to require private employers to provide earned paid leave to employees for any reason.
Conducting business in the U.S. Virgin Islands poses unique challenges not often encountered in the states, but also unique opportunities. This 20-part series offers tips for doing business in the U.S. Virgin Islands, covering a broad array of topics affecting employers. Part 10 of this series addresses the laws relevant to tracking hours worked and compensating hourly employees for regular and overtime hours.
Recently, and for the first time in more than 20 years, the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit ruled on the transportation worker exemption contained in Section 1 of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). In Waithaka v. Amazon.com, Inc., 966 F.3d 10 (1st Cir. 2020), the court of appeals upheld a district court’s decision not to compel Amazon “AmFlex” delivery drivers (who are independent contractors) to arbitrate their wage claims. The decision is significant for companies that require their delivery drivers to sign arbitration agreements.
On August 8, 2020, President Donald Trump issued a presidential memorandum that addresses the need for additional assistance for workers who have lost wages due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.
On August 31, 2020, the Wage and Hour Division of the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) issued four opinion letters, one of which, Opinion Letter FLSA2020-11, addressed whether certain employees in the oilfield services industry were exempt from the overtime requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The specific question answered by the DOL in FLSA2020-11 involved truck drivers of an oilfield waste-removal company and the “retail or service establishment” overtime exemption of the FLSA (29 U.S.C. § 207(i), better known as the “Section 7(i) exemption”).
The state of Georgia has had a lactation break law on the books for quite some time, but with House Bill 1090 the legislature made some important changes, effective August 5, 2020. As most employers know, the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) provides lactation break requirements for employers, so there has not been a lot of focus on Georgia’s state counterpart, which was merely permissive. That is until now. The Georgia amendment has beefed up the statute in a few notable ways.
On August 31, 2020, the U.S. Department of Labor’s (DOL) Wage and Hour Division (WHD) released opinion letter FLSA2020-14.
In Davidson v. O’Reilly Auto Enterprises, LLC, No. 18-56188 (August 3, 2020), the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals addressed whether a district court abused its discretion in denying class certification for an employee’s claim for improper rest breaks under California law where the employer allegedly had a facially defective written rest break policy.
The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a transformation of the workplace and an explosion of remote work, including for employees previously not covered under employers’ telecommuting policies. Despite the reopening of most state economies, many employers are continuing to allow their workforces to work remotely. Remote work by nonexempt employees can pose a challenge with regard to ensuring employees are paid for all time worked, as the traditional workday may be blurred in a remote environment. On August 24, 2020, the U.S. Department of Labor’s (DOL) Wage and Hour Division issued Field Assistance Bulletin (FAB) No. 2020-5 regarding employers’ obligations to use reasonable diligence in tracking remote employees’ hours. The guidance affirms the value of a clear system for reporting time and a requirement that employees promptly and accurately report their time—especially in a remote work environment.
On August 7, 2020, the San Francisco Office of Economic and Workforce Development (OEWD) published guidance regarding the City of San Francisco’s “Temporary Right to Reemployment Following Layoff Due to COVID-19 Pandemic Emergency Ordinance.” Also known as the “Back to Work” emergency ordinance, the ordinance took effect on July 3, 2020, requiring San Francisco employers with 100 or more employees to offer reemployment to eligible employees laid off because of the COVID-19 pandemic when the employers rehire for the same or similar job classifications.
In a decision that may be useful to employers deciding whether workers should be classified as independent contractors or employees, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) found that an exotic dancer at the Centerfold Club in Columbus, Ohio, was an employee rather than an independent contractor.
Despite all that is going on in the world, the California legislature has been busy this year. Below is a summary of the major employment law bills that are working their way through the state Assembly and Senate.
How can employers assist working parents during the fall school year? This is one of the top questions on the minds of management and employees as the fall school year begins. Based on data from the U.S. Department of Labor, it is estimated that 41 percent of workers between the ages of 20 and 54 have a child at home. It is also estimated that single parents make up approximately 30 percent of the workforce.
On August 8, 2020, President Trump issued a memorandum with the stated purpose of providing “further temporary relief … to support working Americans” by enabling the deferral of employee Social Security taxes for specific individuals.
On August 8, 2020, President Donald Trump issued a memorandum, which establishes a “lost wages assistance program” to help workers affected by the COVID-19 pandemic by dipping into the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Disaster Relief Fund (DRF).
An increase in the number of scams involving false unemployment benefits claims are emerging in Nevada and across the country. Third parties are filing claims for unemployment insurance benefits using the names and personal information of employees who have not lost their jobs. They are often using accurate personal information, including Social Security numbers.
On July 16, 2020, the Wage and Hour Division of the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) published new efforts to improve management of leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (FMLA).
On July 8, 2020, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) released guidance for employers on reporting qualifying wages paid to employees under the Emergency Paid Sick Leave Act (EPSLA) and Emergency Family and Medical Leave Expansion Act (EFMLEA). Both laws are part of the “phase one” coronavirus legislation, the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA), passed on March 18, 2020.
On May 6, 2020, Governor Gavin Newsom of California issued Executive Order (EO) N-62-20, creating a temporary rebuttable presumption that employees working outside of their homes who test positive for COVID-19, the disease caused by SARS-CoV-2, may receive workers’ compensation benefits. In doing so, the governor simplified the process for sick employees to seek certain wage replacement benefits, and therefore sought to encourage ill employees to stay home to reduce the spread of COVID-19.
As most employers are aware, Nevada has a two-tier minimum wage system. Currently, Nevada employers are required to pay their employees a minimum of $8.25 per hour unless they qualify to pay the lower tier minimum wage rate of $7.25 per hour. Employers seeking to qualify for the lower tier minimum wage must meet the following requirements: (1) the employer must offer qualifying health insurance benefits; (2) those benefits must be offered to the employee and any dependents; (3) the employee’s share of the cost of the premium for health insurance benefits cannot exceed 10 percent of the employee’s income; and (4) the employer must provide a benefit in the form of health insurance at least equivalent to the one dollar per hour in wages that the employee would otherwise receive. Nevada employers that believe they qualify to pay the lower minimum wage should consider reviewing their health insurance benefits to ensure the benefits meet the stringent requirements of Nevada Administrative Code sections 608.102 and 608.104.
On June 8, 2020, the U.S. Department of Labor’s (DOL) Wage and Hour Division (WHD) published its revised fluctuating workweek methodology regulation for calculating overtime in the Federal Register. The new final rule goes into effect on August 7, 2020.
In response to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and its continued impact on daily life, Governor Gavin Newsom issued Executive Order (EO) N-63-20 on May 7, 2020, extending certain statutory and regulatory deadlines for individuals, businesses, and governmental agencies in California. In addition to other temporary changes, EO N-63-20 extends the time for employees to file certain claims for unpaid wages with the state labor commissioner, the time for the state to issue certain workplace safety citations under the California Occupational Safety and Health Act, and the time for employers to appeal such citations.
Oregon employers feeling the financial strain of economic disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic are bracing themselves for another impact. On July 1, 2020, Oregon’s minimum wage increase will take effect.
On April 30, 2020, the Texas Workforce Commission (TWC) issued guidance identifying the circumstances in which an employee may remain eligible for the receipt of unemployment benefits despite the employee’s refusal of an offer to return to work. These circumstances included, for example, an individual being considered high risk due to his or her age (65 or older) or being diagnosed with COVID-19 and not having recovered.
Effective with the May 19, 2020, publication in the Federal Register, the U.S. Department of Labor’s (DOL) Wage and Hour Division revokes the arbitrary lists it created in 1961 identifying industries that may, or would not, qualify as retail or service in nature “for purposes of an exemption from overtime pay applicable to commission-based employees.”
On April 30, 2020, the Supreme Court of California issued its decision in Nationwide Biweekly Administration, Inc. v. Superior Court of Alameda County, a case that received a fair amount of attention in 2019 when it seemed possible the court might allow claims under California Business & Professions Code Sections 17200 et seq. and 17500 et seq. (commonly called the unfair competition law (UCL)) to be tried by jury.