If you’re a business subject to the California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA), the last few months have been incredibly frustrating.
Archives for July 7, 2023
CDPH Changes the Definition of “Outbreak” and Masking Recommendations
ShareTweetGoogleLinkedinPrintMail
On June 20, 2023, the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) revised its COVID-19 Public Health Officer Order for COVID-19 Disease Control & Prevention. The Agency changed the definition of “outbreak” in non-health care settings, and provided updated guidance on masking. To reflect the changes, the CDPH also updated its “Public Health Order Questions and Answers: COVID-19 Disease Control and Prevention.”
U.S. SUPREME COURT ROUND-UP (July 2023)
During its most recent term, the United States Supreme Court issued two decisions that may affect California employers. We summarize those rulings, and two upcoming cases, below.
Felice Ekelman Spotlighted for Her Recent Book on Hybrid Work
Felice Ekelman was spotlighted for her recent book Thrive with a Hybrid Workplace: Step-by-Step Guidance from the Experts in “7 Ways to Improve Your Leadership in Today’s Hybrid Workplace,” published by Inc.com.
Top Five Labor Law Developments for June 2023
The National Labor Relations Board returned to its prior employee-friendly test for determining whether an individual is an independent contractor. The Atlanta Opera, Inc., 372 NLRB No. 95 (June 13, 2023).
Initial Ripple Effects of U.S. Supreme Court Affirmative Action in Student Admissions Decision
In its decision holding the use of race in university and college admissions is unconstitutional in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, the U.S. Supreme Court noted that “[e]liminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it.” Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, No. 20-1199, together with Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. Univ. of North Carolina, No. 21-707 (June 29, 2023).
U.S. Supreme Court Rules on Narrow Jurisdictional Question in Fractured Opinion
In a 5-4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld Pennsylvania’s “registration statute,” which requires corporations that register to do business in Pennsylvania to consent to the “general personal jurisdiction” of Pennsylvania. Mallory v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co., No. 21-1168 (June 27, 2023).
FTC Proposes Amendments to Hart-Scott-Rodino Disclosures, With Changes Focusing on Workplace Issues
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC), with “concurrence” of the assistant attorney general for the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), has issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) proposing significant amendments to the Premerger Notification and Report Form filed by parties in connection with the antitrust review of mergers and acquisitions (M&A) above a certain monetary threshold (currently, $111.4 million). The proposed amendments add new — and onerous — disclosure requirements concerning the workforce composition of the transaction parties.
Retail Industry Workplace Law Update – Summer 2023
The Wage and Hour Division of the Department of Labor has advised in an opinion letter on calculating Family and Medical Leave Act leave when employees take off part of a week during which a holiday falls that holidays are not counted toward leave, unless an employee takes the entire week off or the employee was scheduled to work on the holiday.
How the U.S. Supreme Court’s Affirmative Action in Student Admissions Decision Affects Employers
The U.S. Supreme Court held that the use of race in university and college admissions is unconstitutional. Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, No. 20-1199, together with Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. Univ. of North Carolina, No. 21-707 (June 29, 2023). The Court’s ruling directly addresses only the admissions decisions of educational institutions that accept “federal financial assistance” based on an analysis under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The decision also may have implications for employers.
Navigating Reductions in Force in the Life Science Industry
The life sciences industry is certainly not immune to changes in the economic climate. While never an easy decision for employers, some life sciences companies have had to lay off or reduce their workforces to help refine their strategies and streamline their operating structure.
U.S. Supreme Court: First Amendment Entitled ‘Expressive’ Web Designer to Refuse Service to Same-Sex Couples
Colorado’s Anti-Discrimination Act (CADA) constituted an impermissible infringement on its citizens’ First Amendment right to freedom of speech, as the Act could compel individuals and businesses to engage in speech with which they disagree, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in a 6-3 decision written by Justice Neil Gorsuch. 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, No. 21-476 (June 30, 2023).
‘Tester’ Needs Standing to Sue Under ADA, Jackson Lewis Says in Amicus Brief to U.S. Supreme Court
Self-appointed “testers” need to establish their legal right to sue under the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) by showing a concrete and particularized injury, Jackson Lewis attorneys wrote in an amicus brief submitted to the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of The Restaurant Law Center in Acheson Hotels, LLC v. Laufer, No. 22-429.
Illinois Bill Mandating Temp Workers Receive ‘Equal Pay’ Compared to Direct Hires Sent to Governor
A bill that substantially amends the Illinois Day and Temporary Labor Services Act (DTLSA) to impose expansive new duties on Illinois staffing agencies, and on all employers who rely on temporary and day laborers, has been sent to the governor for signature. Governor J.B. Pritzker is widely expected to sign the bill (HB 2862) into law.
District of Columbia Cannabis Employment Protections Amendment Act Goes Live July 13
The District of Columbia is joining the increasing number of jurisdictions providing greater protections for private employees who use marijuana off-duty, during non-work hours. Such development remains in contrast with federal law, which still classifies marijuana as a controlled substance, prohibiting both possession and use of marijuana.