Parents, employers, and communities across the country are managing uncertainty around returning to school this fall. Many schools have opened, or soon will open, using some element of virtual learning. As we discussed earlier this summer, parents and employers have had to show flexibility and grace during this back to school season.
In March 2020, everyone thought we just need to occupy our children at home for a few weeks, maybe through spring break, and we would be fine. Then it was “just make it to summer.” Now summer is winding down and many kids are not going back to school full-time (at least not in person) any time soon. This creates tremendous challenges for families as well as employers.
Many people have commented on social media regarding the anti-racist movement that has been gaining strength in the wake of police officers killings around the country. Unfortunately, some of these posts are inflammatory, derogatory, offensive, or racist. Even though employees are generally posting on their personal social media pages and are often doing so outside of work time, coworkers and even community-members to employers are increasingly complaining about offensive comments employees are posting on various social media platforms. While sometimes the conduct is so severe that employers can easily determine the appropriate consequences, in other cases employers must balance a variety of legal requirements, employee and public relations concerns, and their own company values. The following are answers to frequently asked questions about these issues.
On April 16, 2020, Wisconsin Department of Health Services Secretary Andrea Palm issued an updated Safer at Home Order (Emergency Order #28), which extends and makes certain adjustments to the agency’s original order that took effect on March 25, 2020. The updated order is effective April 24, 2020, and will remain in effect until 8:00 a.m. on May 26, 2020. The state also issued a list of frequently asked questions (FAQs) related to the order.
The Beltway Buzz is a weekly update summarizing labor and employment news from inside the Beltway and clarifying how what’s happening in Washington, D.C. could impact your business.
The Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA) went into effect on April 1, 2020, and, just in time, the Department of Labor (DOL) issued temporary regulations to implement the new provisions of the Expanded Family and Medical Leave Expansion Act (EFMLEA) and the Emergency Paid Sick Leave Act (EPSLA). The regulations largely align with the DOL’s updated “Questions and Answers” (Q&As) that it issued on March 28, 2020. The DOL’s Q&As addressed furloughs, intermittent leave, exceptions for very small businesses, exemptions for health care providers, telework, among other aspects of the law.
On March 18, 2020, President Donald Trump signed the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA) in response to the spread of the novel coronavirus and the illness it causes, COVID-19. Among other fiscal packages, the act does three things: (1) expands the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) temporarily (until the end of December 2020) to cover leave needed for the care of children out of school because of COVID-19 and also makes weeks 3 through 12 of its effective period paid leave; (2) creates 2 weeks of paid sick leave for childcare and other leave related to the coronavirus; and (3) provides for tax credits related to the paid leave provisions created by the act.
On February 27, 2020, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in Rizo v. Yovino, (again) found that salary history is not a “factor other than sex” that can justify a pay disparity in defense of a claim under the Equal Pay Act of 1963 (EPA). The Ninth Circuit made the same finding in 2018, but the Supreme Court of the United States remanded the case because the judge who authored the original opinion died before it was published.
On August 8, 2019, the Department of Labor (DOL) issued an opinion letter confirming that a parent is entitled to time off under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) to attend a meeting at school to discuss his or her child’s Individualized Education Program (IEP).
As we previously reported, the Illinois legislature passed House Bill 834 and Governor J. B. Pritzker signed the bill into law. It will become effective September 29, 2019. The new law prohibits employers from requesting or requiring prospective employees to provide their salary histories as a condition of being considered for employment.
After ending 2018 with a slew of new employment laws, Illinois continues to enact legislation impacting employers. Following the example set by California, Washington, and other states recently, the Illinois legislature passed four new bills targeting equity, transparency, and discrimination last week, and Governor J. B. Pritzker is expected to sign them into law.
One year ago today, 10 days after the Harvey Weinstein story broke, Alyssa Milano tweeted: “If you’ve been sexually harassed or assaulted write ‘me too’ as a reply to this tweet.”
Vermont and likely Connecticut will soon join California, Delaware, Massachusetts, Oregon, and Puerto Rico (along with various cities and counties) in prohibiting salary history inquiries.
Wisconsin Statutes Section 111.70(4)(d)(3) provides that, “Annually, the [Wisconsin Employment Relations Commission] shall conduct an election to certify the representative of the collective bargaining unit that contains a general municipal employee.”
The Wisconsin-based employer is reportedly the first in the United States to offer microchips (at a cost to the employer of $300 each) to employees on a voluntary basis.
During his campaign, President Trump proposed a plan to offer six weeks of paid maternity leave to mothers who give birth. The program would be funded through the unemployment compensation system. The Family and Medical Leave Act provides unpaid job protection, but it does not provide for paid leave.