By: Scott M. Plamondon

[UPDATE: Since this article was posted, the Senate Appropriations Committee suspended AB 889. We will continue to monitor the progress of this bill.]

For many couples in California, a night on the town is a welcomed break from parenting responsibilities, and an opportunity to become reacquainted with one another.  The routine of preparing for a night on the town generally involves making dinner reservations, purchasing movie tickets, and arranging for a babysitter to come to the family home for the evening. As a result of a bill currently before the California legislature, however, this simple routine may become far more complicated, and fraught with danger.

Assembly Bill 889 recently cleared the state assembly, and is expected to pass with the overwhelming support of the legislature. Under AB 889, by hiring a babysitter for your night on the town you may be considered an “employer,” and thereby obligated to pay the babysitter at least minimum wage and provide workers’ compensation benefits. As an employer, you also would be required to provide meal and rest breaks, so you may need to hire a second babysitter to watch the kids while the first sitter is on a mandatory thirty- minute meal break. Should your night on the town run long, you may even be liable to the babysitter for overtime compensation. Apparently, your night on the town is about to become a lot more complicated and expensive.

Although much of the discussion surrounding AB 889 relates to its impact on the ability to hire a babysitter, the effect of this legislation is potentially more broad. If passed, the legislation would apply to all domestic work employees, and cover “people performing services related to the care of persons in private households or maintenance of private households or their premises.” Accordingly, the reach of this legislation may go far beyond personal caregivers such as babysitters, and likely also will apply to individuals such as your gardener, handyman, or that friend who stays at your house and feeds your cat while you are on vacation. 

Failure to comply with AB 889’s requirements may result in civil liability as the legislation gives rise to a private cause of action by any domestic work employee who believes he or she has not been afforded the rights granted to him or her under this legislation. Further, because the failure to secure workers’ compensation insurance is a misdemeanor, violation of AB 889 could result in criminal prosecution. Graciously, AB 889 does not apply to domestic work employees under the age of 18, so hiring the neighborhood kids to mow your lawn appears to remain a viable option, and thus far, has not been deemed exploitative child labor.

We will continue to monitor the progress of this legislation, and post additional updates and analysis as it makes its way through the state legislature.

For more info, click here.

Wednesday, September 14, 2011

12:00 PM – 12:30 PM FREE Lunchtime Teleconference

Location: Teleconference –

Dial 1-610-214-0100
Access Code: 341076#

Payment Details:
• Members: $0.00 in advance (By Sep 13) / $0.00 at the door

• Non-Members: $0.00 in advance (By Sep 13) / $0.00 at the door

The Topic:
Mutual Wage Agreements. Can You Contract Around Overtime Obligations?

Examining the new Arechiga v. Dolores Press, Inc. case – can California employers enter into mutual wage agreements with non-exempt employees that factor in overtime pay to their set compensation? Come hear Lizbeth (“Beth”) West, employment attorney and SEAC Board Chair, discuss this newest case and strategies (and potential pitfalls) of entering into agreements with non-exempt employees to avoid statutory overtime obligations. Get the lowdown on how to construct a “mutual wage agreement” before you tread on thin ice….

The Speaker(s):

Lizbeth ‘Beth’ West, Esq.

Speaker Background:
Lizbeth V. West, Esq. is a partner with Weintraub Genshlea Chediak Tobin & Tobin. Her practice focuses on counseling and training employers and management staff on employment issues such as hiring, disciplinary actions, privacy, terminations, lay-offs, employment policies and contracts, protection of trade secrets, wage and hour laws, leave laws, prevention of discrimination, harassment and retaliation, and compliance with other state and federal employment laws. She also has extensive experience defending employers in various forms of employment-related litigation in state and federal court, and in administrative actions before a number of state and federal agencies.

Note: The speaker’s presentation is for informational purposes. Attendees should always consult with their legal counsel to determine how the information discussed during the meeting affects their particular circumstances.

Big news! Weintraub’s L&E Law Blog is one of the nominated candidates for the LexisNexis Top 25 Labor and Employment Law Blogs of 2011.

We need your help! Click here, log onto the Labor and Employment Law Community and then leave a comment at the bottom of the page saying “I vote for The Labor & Employment Law Blog.” Voting ends September 12th.

Feel free to share this with others (via social media or other avenues) to get out the vote.

Thanks for the support, and don’t forget to vote!

By: Labor & Employment

On August 25, 2011, the National Labor Relations Board (the “NLRB”) issued a new rule which requires all private-sector employers (including labor unions) subject to the National Labor Relations Act (the “Act”) to post a notice informing employees of their rights under the Act. The required notice will include information about employees’ rights to act together to improve wages and working conditions, to form, join, and assist a union, to bargain collectively with their employer, and to refrain from any of these activities. The final rule takes effect on November 14, 2011.

The notice must be at least 11 inches by 17 inches in size and posted in a conspicuous place where it can be readily seen by employees. In addition to the physical posting, the notice must be posted to any intranet or internet site maintained by the employer which contains other personnel rules and policies.

The NLRB will make an acceptable notice available starting on November 1, 2011. Employers can either download a free copy of the notice from the NLRB’s website or request a free copy by contacting the NLRB at its headquarters or its regional, sub-regional, or resident offices. Alternatively, employers can satisfy the rule by purchasing a set of workplace posters from a commercial supplier.

Continue Reading NLRB Issues New Employer Posting Requirements Effective November 14, 2011

By: Lizbeth V. West, Esq.

Last September, California’s previous governor (the “Governator;” oops I mean Governor Schwarzenegger) signed into law a new statutory leave entitlement for certain employees who are going to donate their bone marrow or an organ to another.

The law was codified in Labor Code section 1510 and provided that an employer must grant a paid leave of absence to an employee who is an organ donor or a bone marrow donor. The leave of absence to an organ donor is up to 30 days in a one-year period. The leave of absence for a bone marrow donor is up to 5 days in a one-year period. The leave of absence for either donor is not a break in his or her continuous service for the purpose of his or her right to salary adjustments, sick leave, vacation, annual leave, or seniority. As a condition of an employee’s initial receipt of the leave of absence, an employer may require the employee to take a specified number of days of earned but unused sick or vacation leave, unless that would violate provisions of an applicable collective bargaining agreement.

California’s current Governor Brown signed Senate Bill 272 on August 1, 2011 in order to clarify certain provisions in Labor Code section 1510.
Continue Reading Governor Brown Signed Bill To Amend Organ and Bone Marrow Donation Leave Law