On November 19, 2012, a bill (A3423) was introduced that seeks to authorize the establishment, through collective bargaining, of alternate workers’ compensation programs. Such programs would include alternate dispute resolution systems for such claims, the creation of light duty, joint labor-management occupational safety and health committees, and benefits supplementary to those provided under workers’ compensation or temporary disability insurance. The Commissioner of the New Jersey Department of Labor would be required to monitor any such programs reached through bargaining. The bill would also permit groups of employers participating in Taft-Hartley trust funds to apply to the Commissioner of Banking and Insurance for approval to agree to pool their workers’ compensation liabilities for the purpose of qualifying as members of a group plan for self-insurance.
Recommended Reading
Welcome to the California Advice Group
The California Advice Group at Ogletree Deakins was born out of the need to provide California-specific advice to the firm’s national clients with operations or employees inside the state of California. Members of the California Advice Group are amongst Ogletree Deakins’s “designated hitters” for questions lobbed to lawyers practicing in…..
USCIS Receives Around 172,500 H-1B Petitions, Completes Selection Lottery
On April 7, 2014, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) stated that it had received sufficient H-1B cap-subject petitions to reach the annual 65,000 “regular cap” limit for fiscal year (FY) 2015. USCIS also received more than 20,000 H-1B petitions filed on behalf of foreign nationals who possess U.S. advanced degrees.
Constructively Quit or Fired?—California Court Holds Employer Must Exhaust All Reasonable Alternatives
Kelley v. California Unemployment Ins. Appeals Board, B244098 (February 10, 2014): A California Court of Appeals recently upheld a trial court’s decision that an employee, who was fired for making what the employer considered unreasonable requests, is entitled to unemployment benefits. The court found that the employee did not “constructively quit” her job by making