Ogletree Deakins • November 21, 2017
A new addition to California law changes the definition of commission pay for licensed employees of beauty salons and barber shops. Under the new law, certain common arrangements, such as agreements to pay stylists on a commission-only basis or on a minimum wage plus commissions basis, are no longer considered to be commission-based pay.
XpertHR • November 20, 2017
New York City has expanded its paid sick leave law so that employees may take "safe time" when they or a family member are the victim of domestic violence, sexual assault, human trafficking or stalking. The Earned Sick and Safe Time Act does not change the total amount of leave an employee may take - no less than 40 hours per year - but expands the reasons for which they may use the leave.
Littler Mendelson, P.C. • November 20, 2017
On November 15, 2017, the Puerto Rico Department of the Treasury (the "PR Treasury") issued Administrative Determination Number 17-29 ("AD 17-29") to provide special rules and procedures applicable to distributions from qualified retirement plans and individual retirement accounts ("IRAs") following Hurricane María.
Jackson Lewis P.C. • November 20, 2017
The grace period is over. Effective January 1, 2018, the City of Santa Monica’s minimum cap on accrued sick leave for eligible employees will increase from 40 to 72 hours for businesses with 26 or more employees. The accrual-cap for businesses with 25 or fewer employees will increase from 32 to 40 hours.
Ogletree Deakins • November 20, 2017
On November 9, 2017, the New Jersey Senate introduced Senate Bill 3518, which would drastically limit an employer’s ability to enter into, and subsequently enforce, restrictive covenants (or “non-compete” agreements) with employees. The bill would also impose certain notice and monetary obligations on employers that seek to enforce restrictive covenants against their former employees. If passed, Senate Bill 3518 will have a dramatic impact on a New Jersey employer’s ability to protect its legitimate business interests and prevent unfair competition by former employees.
FordHarrison LLP • November 20, 2017
Executive Summary: Georgia’s recent Restrictive Covenant Act, enacted in 2011, does not directly address non-solicitation of employees a/k/a non-recruitment covenants, thereby leaving such provisions subject to the principles developed by courts through “common law” (i.e. case law). Because Georgia common law is not well developed on the requirements of employee non-solicitation covenants, employers often second guess the enforceability of such covenants. Fortunately, the Georgia Court of Appeals recently provided some clarification on these covenants in CMGRP, Inc. v. Gallant, No. A17A1168 (Ga. Ct. App. Oct. 4, 2017), where it made clear that non-solicitation of employees covenants do not require geographic or material contact limitations to be enforceable.
Jackson Lewis P.C. • November 17, 2017
Employers in Puerto Rico must comply with updated regulations on the payment of the generally required annual bonus to eligible employees. The Puerto Rico Department of Labor (DOL) updated the regulations, effective October 18, 2017, following legislation adopted early in the year.
FordHarrison LLP • November 17, 2017
Executive Summary. On November 1, 2017, the NYS DOH issued its "Application for Fiscal Intermediary Authorization" and implementation guidelines. Significantly, DOH imposed a very short timeframe, stating: "As of November 1, 2017, all existing FIs will have thirty (30) days to submit their FI Authorization application to the Department." If no filing is made, the FI must cease operating under CDPAP. Those who wish to begin operating an FI may also want to file by this date. A copy of the application can be obtained at https://www.health.ny.gov/health_care/medicaid/redesign/mrt_10003.htm
Littler Mendelson, P.C. • November 17, 2017
A California Court of Appeal dealt another blow to employers in a recent ruling interpreting the state’s Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA). In Lopez v. Friant & Associates, the court considered the proof required for a PAGA plaintiff to succeed on a claim based on underlying violations of Labor Code section 226(a).1 In short, the court held that PAGA plaintiffs asserting such claims need not show that the violation caused “injury” or resulted from “knowing and intentional” conduct, as required for a penalty award under a related Labor Code provision.
Ogletree Deakins • November 17, 2017
On November 3, 2017, Maine Governor Paul LePage announced that he had vetoed a bill sent to his desk with tepid support that would have taxed and regulated the commercial sale of recreational marijuana. The veto prolongs a somewhat odd state of affairs in Maine in which Mainers may legally possess and cultivate recreational marijuana for personal use, but the commercial sale of recreational pot has yet to be authorized. Accordingly, so-called “pot shops” have not been allowed to open in the state. In November of 2016, Maine voters approved a recreational marijuana ballot initiative that legalized the possession of up to 2.5 ounces of recreational marijuana by residents 21 years of age or older, as well as the cultivation of up to six adult marijuana plants for personal use. The ballot initiative also approved the commercial sale of recreational marijuana, but Maine’s legislature has yet to allow that to happen.