In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Congress recently passed the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (“FFCRA”). Among other things, the FFCRA requires certain employers to provide their employees with paid sick leave and expanded family and medical leave for specified reasons related to COVID-19. Employees’ leave rights under the FFCRA apply from April 1, 2020
Court Blocks Ban on Mandatory Arbitration Agreements in Employment
Mandatory arbitration agreements in California employment have been granted a stay of execution. For now. Earlier today, a federal judge in California issued a temporary restraining order enjoining enforcement of AB 51, the new California law that would have banned employers in the state from requiring employees to sign mandatory arbitration agreements as a condition
Employees Are Entitled to Reporting Time Pay if Required to Call In to Confirm Shifts
Figuring out how many employees to schedule each day can be an inexact science. Unexpected surges or lulls in customers, employee absences due to illness or emergencies, and various other circumstances can impact personnel needs. Employers sometimes choose to navigate these situations by overscheduling and then cutting loose employees who are not ultimately needed. That approach, however, triggers “reporting time” obligations, under which those employees are entitled to a minimum amount of pay for reporting for work. But what does it mean to “report for work”? What if an employer allows employees to call in a few hours before a scheduled shift to determine whether they are needed? Are employees required to physically show up to trigger reporting time obligations, or do these phone calls constitute “reporting for work” for this purpose? The answer is the latter according to a recent California appellate court in Ward v. Tilly’s, Inc.
Continue Reading Employees Are Entitled to Reporting Time Pay if Required to Call In to Confirm Shifts
California Labor Commissioner and Attorney General Jointly Answer “Frequently Asked Questions” on Immigration Sweeps
In case you haven’t noticed, immigration has been a hot topic of discussion in the news lately. While debates over Dreamers and the wall have dominated those discussions, the workplace has been swept into it all as well. On the one hand, the federal government’s efforts to curb illegal immigration have reached the workplace via frequent raids of businesses suspected of employing undocumented workers. On the other hand, California has deemed itself a “sanctuary state” and pushed back on these immigration sweeps via laws that punish employers who cooperate with federal authorities carrying out the raids. The collateral damage in that fight may just be the employers who are stuck in the middle. Employers who allow ICE agents into their business risk violating California law, but employers who turn the same agents away could find themselves in hot water with federal authorities. What to do? Fortunately, the state Labor Commissioner and Attorney General have jointly issued some guidance to aid employers in navigating these treacherous waters.
Continue Reading California Labor Commissioner and Attorney General Jointly Answer “Frequently Asked Questions” on Immigration Sweeps
No Recording Policy Violates The NLRA
It stands to reason that employers may not want employees recording conversations in the workplace. Recording conversations could discourage the free flow of open ideas. The recordings could also contain confidential or sensitive information that the employer does not want floating around the digital universe. In some states, recording workplace conversations may even be illegal