On November 14, 2019, the Oregon Court of Appeals in Maza v. Waterford Operations, LLC, 300 Or. App. 471 (2019), addressed the question of whether an employer can be found strictly liable under Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR) 839-020-0050(2) when an hourly employee takes less than the entire duty-free, 30-minute lunch break to which the employee is otherwise entitled, regardless of the circumstances.
On June 11, 2019, Governor Kate Brown signed into law the Oregon Workplace Fairness Act (SB 726), which will significantly impact all Oregon employers. The Act addresses concerns of the #MeToo movement by imposing strict requirements on how Oregon employers respond to complaints of harassment and discrimination. The legislation also significantly increases the statute of limitations within which an employee may assert a claim of discrimination, from one year to five years.
On May 14, 2019, Oregon Governor Kate Brown signed House Bill (HB) 2992, which imposes a new burden on employers that want to have enforceable noncompetition agreements with their Oregon employees. For any noncompetition agreement entered into on or after January 1, 2020, employers must provide employees with a signed, written copy of the terms of the noncompetition agreement within 30 days after the termination of employment.
On April 25, 2018, the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI) issued proposed rules implementing Oregon’s predictive scheduling law, Senate Bill 828, which will take effect on July 1, 2018.
In July 2017, the Oregon Legislature passed House Bill 3458, which is expected to be signed by Governor Kate Brown. The new law will permit employers to pay nonexempt employees in mills, factories, and manufacturing establishments the greater of daily or weekly overtime, reversing recent guidance from the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI) that had required manufacturing employers to “pyramid” (i.e., pay both) daily and weekly overtime hours.
The Oregon governor is expected to soon sign Senate Bill 828, which will impose predictive scheduling requirements on large employers in certain industries. Here are answers to some of the most frequently asked questions about the new law.
After the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI) made a surprising change to its interpretation of how daily and weekly overtime should be calculated for employees who work in mills, factories, and manufacturing establishments, last week the Multnomah County Circuit Court issued an opinion rejecting BOLI’s new interpretation.
The Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI) recently made a surprising change in its interpretation of the daily and weekly overtime requirements for manufacturers. Employers may be able to obtain a waiver from complying with this new interpretation.
The Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI) has made an important change to its interpretation of the relationship between two Oregon overtime laws. Under BOLI’s new guidance, nonexempt employees who work in mills, factories, or manufacturing establishments may be entitled to both daily and weekly overtime compensation.
On March 22, 2016, Utah Governor Gary Herbert signed into law the Post-Employment Restrictions Act (H.B. 251), which limits the duration of post-employment noncompete agreements between employers and employees to a maximum of one year from the employee’s date of separation. Under the new law, any such agreement containing a noncompete restriction exceeding the Act’s one-year limitation will be deemed void.
The Utah State Legislature recently passed S.B. 59, a bill that would amend the Utah Antidiscrimination Act to require employers with 15 or more Utah employees to provide reasonable accommodations related to pregnancy, childbirth, breastfeeding, or related conditions. The bill is currently awaiting the governor’s signature.
The Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI) has issued additional guidance on complying with the new Oregon statewide mandatory paid sick leave law, Senate Bill 454, OL 2015, Ch. 537, which takes effect on January 1, 2016.
A federal court in Oregon recently ruled that employment agreements may impose a reasonable limitation on the time period in which an employee may bring statutory and common law claims against his or her employer, even when that time period is shorter than the statute of limitations. In Felix v. Guardsmark, LLC, 3:13-CV-00447-BR (D. Or.,