|
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
State Employment Law Articles
Report Link Employment Policies Update: Employers Urged To Update Cell Phone Policies.Barker Olmsted & Barnier - July 11, 2008 If you are a regular reader of this Legal Update, by now you are tired of hearing about the new cell phone law. Here it is once again: Effective July 1, 2008, Senate Bill 1613 provides that it is illegal to drive a motor vehicle while using a wireless telephone, unless a hands-free device for the cell phone is used. Report Link California Expands Data Breach Notification Requirements to Include Medical and Health Insurance Information.Jackson Lewis LLP - October 31, 2007 Certain medical information and health insurance information will be included in the type of personal information triggering notifications of unauthorized access in California, effective January 1, 2008. In 2003, California was the first state to enact breach notification legislation. Since then, most other states have followed. These statutes help protect individuals from the effects of the misuse of their personal information by requiring state agencies and businesses aware of unauthorized access to such information to notify the affected individuals as soon as possible. Report Link Proposed Legislation Would Require California Employers to Verify Employee's Social Security Numbers And Penalize Those Who Don't.Littler Mendelson, P.C. - March 20, 2007 On February 21, 2007, Assemblyman Chuck DeVore (Republican, 70th District) introduced the Employment Verification Act of 2007. Report Link California Court Ruling Restricts Out of State Recording of Confidential Conversations.Jackson Lewis LLP - August 03, 2006 The California Supreme Court has ruled that out of state businesses that record confidential communications with California residents without first obtaining consent violate state privacy law. Businesses that record conversations with employees in California must first notify the employee that the conversation is being recorded or risk the full range of civil penalties for injuries caused by the unauthorized recording. Report Link California Privacy Laws May Not Protect Surreptitiously Taped Telephone Calls.Jackson Lewis LLP - May 04, 2006 The Supreme Court of New York held in a recent slip opinion that residents of New York are not protected by California privacy laws when their confidential telephone calls to or from California are tape recorded. This case potentially has far-reaching consequences given that privacy laws in the majority of states, and under federal rules, are similar to the New York governing statutes. If this decision takes on steam, we may see more such rulings in states throughout this country. Report Link Employers at Risk for Telephone Monitoring Without Notice (pdf).Vedder Price - April 29, 2005 A California appeals court has held that an employee
fired after his supervisor had secretly monitored a
telephone conversation may sue his employer for invasion
of privacy, wrongful termination and intentional infliction
of emotional distress. Report Link California's New Megan's Law Website: Employers Are Cautioned Not to Make Precipitous Employment Decisions.Littler Mendelson, P.C. - January 24, 2005 On December 15, 2004, California 's new Megan's Law website was unveiled, allowing anyone with the click of a mouse to easily obtain access to California 's database of the state's more than 63,000 registered sex offenders. Report Link New California Statute Addresses Identity Theft Concerns.Pillsbury Winthrop LLP - July 03, 2003 Sections 1798.29 and 1798.82 of the California Civil Code (the Act), which requires state agencies, businesses and individuals that collect and maintain certain personal information in computer databases to notify affected individuals if an unauthorized person may have obtained access to their personal information, took effect on July 1, 2003.
Report Link Employer's Policies Can Affect Expectation of Privacy.Ballard Rosenberg Golper & Savitt - May 23, 2002 Two recent California appellate decisions demonstrate how an employer may affect employees’ privacy expectations with respect to work-related activities. Report Link California Employers Face New Restrictions on the Use of Social Security Numbers.Kauff, McClain & McGuire LLP - May 05, 2002 A recently-enacted California law imposes new restrictions on the use of Social Security numbers for identification purposes. Report Link Consent to Monitoring Waives Privacy in Home Computer Owned by Employer.Ballard Rosenberg Golper & Savitt - March 18, 2002 TBG Insurance Services Corporation v. The Superior Court of Los Angeles County, 2002 Daily Journal D.A.R. 2091 (Cal.App.2d Dist., Div. 1, 2002), in which the court that the employee waived his privacy expectation by acknowledging his employer's written policy permitting the employer to monitor the use.
|
Employment Law Seminars
Affirmative Action : An Overview of Your Obligations
Jackson
August 25, 2008 Baker DonelsonPREVENTING HARASSMENT AND OTHER EEO ISSUES AT WORK: IT’S ALL ABOUT RESPECT (AB1825 COMPLIANCE)Online
August 26, 2008 Shaw ValenzaManaging Business Exposures Successfully: Are You "All In" For The Continual Wave Of Workplace Risks?Irving
2008-9-4 Jackson Lewis LLPTOP TEN WAYS TO VIOLATE WAGE-HOUR LAWSSacramento
September 9, 2008 Shaw Valenza LLPUnlocking The Mystery Of Employee Privacy RightsLos Angeles
2008-9-9 Jackson Lewis LLPUnlocking The Mystery Of Employee Privacy RightsCosta Mesa
2008-9-9 Jackson Lewis LLPUnlocking The Mystery Of Employee Privacy RightsSacramento
2008-9-9 Jackson Lewis LLPUnlocking The Mystery Of Employee Privacy RightsSan Francisco
2008-9-9 Jackson Lewis LLPEmployee vs. ContractorColumbia
September 9, 2008 Nexsen PruetEmployee Free Choice Act: Labor’s Attack on Your Employees’ Right to ChooseOnline
September 9, 2008 McGuire Woods |
|
| ||
|
Terms of Use
|
Privacy
|
Advertising
|
About
|
Contact
|
For Law Firms
|
Partners
Copyright © 2006 elinfonet.com, llc.
All Rights Reserved.
The use of this site, and the terms and conditions for our providing information, is governed by our Terms of Use, including the disclaimers contained therein. By using this site, you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Use and that you accept and will be bound by the terms thereof.
This site is designed for lawyers concentrating in employment law and human resource professionals who specialize in employee relations. As more fully set forth in the terms of use, the information provided on or through this site is for general information purposes; it is not a determination of your legal rights, nor your responsibilities under the law. None of the information contained on this site is, or should be construed as, legal advice. The information should not be relied upon for legal advice. We are not engaged in the practice of law and no attorney-client relationship is being created. Any information communicated to any lawyer via this site does not have the confidentiality protection of the attorney/client privilege. If you are seeking legal advice, find a qualified lawyer in your area. If you need help finding a lawyer, call your local, county or state bar association. All logos and trademarks on this site are property of their respective owners. | ||
Federal Article Feeds