On November 16, 2015, a bill was introduced to extend the protections of the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (NJLAD) to breastfeeding mothers. If enacted, New Jersey Assembly Bill 4696 would require New Jersey employers to provide a reasonable accommodation for breastfeeding mothers, including reasonable break time each day and a suitable room or other location with privacy (other than a toilet stall), in close proximity to the work area, for the employee to express breast milk. Terminating an employee from her employment because she is breastfeeding or expressing breast milk during breaks would constitute a violation under the NJLAD. Previous versions of this bill were unsuccessful in the 2002, 2004, 2008, 2010, 2012, and 2014 legislative sessions.
Agreement Not to Filibuster Nominations for Secretary of Labor and NLRB Avoids “Nuclear Option” in the Senate, But Poses “Time Bomb” for Employers
Yesterday, the U.S. Senate avoided the “nuclear option” on pending nominations for Secretary of Labor-Designate Thomas Perez and for a package of nominees to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The nuclear option would have changed Senate rules by a simple majority vote (rather than the required 67 votes) to end filibusters on presidential executive branch nominations rather than the required 60 votes for “cloture” to cut off debate.
OSHA Anticipates More Changes to the Electronic Recordkeeping Rule: What Does It Mean for Employers?
The Trump administration continues to look for ways to lessen the regulatory burden on employers. As a result, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s (OSHA) electronic recordkeeping regulation continues to be whittled down. OSHA’s latest Regulatory Agenda sets out new changes to the already beleaguered rule. Specifically, OSHA intends to propose to amend the Electronic Recordkeeping rule to eliminate the requirement that establishments with 250 or more employees submit OSHA 300 Logs and 301 forms. Instead, two types of establishments would continue to submit 300A summary forms: (1) establishments of 250 or more employees; and (2) establishments with between 20 and 249 employees in the high-hazard industries listed in Appendix A to the regulation.
Single Act of Disobedience Does Not Disqualify Employee From Unemployment Benefits, California High Court Rules
On July 3, 2014, the California Supreme Court decided whether a single act of disobedience by an employee constitutes misconduct within the meaning of section 1256 of California’s Unemployment Insurance Code, thereby disqualifying the employee from receiving unemployment insurance benefits. The court held that the employee’s refusal to sign a…..