In a unanimous decision, the New Jersey Supreme Court has refused to raise the bar for employees whose job entails ensuring legal compliance (“watchdog” employees) to bring whistleblower claims under the New Jersey Conscientious Employee Protection Act (CEPA). Lippman v. Ethicon, Inc., No. A-65/66-13 (July 15, 2015).
Articles Discussing Labor And Employment Law In All Fifty Us States And Puerto Rico.
South Carolina Lawmakers Ratify OSHA Requirements
As a practical matter, this mainly means SC employers must now report the hospitalization of an employee as well as all partial amputations (including fingertip amputations without bone loss) within 24 hours. Employers must report fatalities within eight hours.
Washington’s Highest Court Rules Piece Rate Compensation Does Not Satisfy Rest Break Pay Requirement
Like all compensation methods, piece rate compensation plans – under which an employee is compensated based on the number of “pieces” he or she generates or completes – must be analyzed for wage-and-hour compliance. For example, under federal law, minimum wage generally is due for all hours worked, and there are recordkeeping obligations, although some piece rate plans may qualify for the section 7(i) overtime exemption. Under state law, employers also must analyze whether piece rate employees’ compensation meets all applicable requirements, which supplement FLSA requirements for most employers. A new decision from Washington state’s highest court reinforces this last principle and imposes further payment obligations on certain Washington employers. Demetrio v. Sakuma Bros. Farms, Inc., 2015 Wash. LEXIS 807 (Wash. July 16, 2015).
California Legislature Overturns Retaliation Holding in Rope v. Auto-Chlor and Classifies a Mere Request for Accommodation as a “Protected Activity”
On July 16, 2015, AB 987 was signed into law by the Governor Jerry Brown which provides a paradigm shift in favor of employees with respect to their retaliation claims. The new law overturns the retaliation holding in Rope v. Auto-Chlor System of Washington, Inc. (2013) 220 Cal.App.4th 635, and makes it unlawful for an employer to retaliate or otherwise discriminate against a person for “requesting” an accommodation based on religion or disability.
What California Employers Need to Know About the New CFRA Regulations Effective July 1, 2015
Executive Summary: On July 1, 2015, the Fair Employment and Housing Council’s (FEHC) new regulations interpreting the California Family Rights Act (CFRA) went into effect. The regulations were intended to clarify the previous regulations and align certain aspects of CFRA with the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). For instance, the new regulations incorporate the March 2013 FMLA regulations to the extent they are not inconsistent. However, CFRA provides additional protections for California employees. Below is a brief summary of some of the significant changes to the CFRA regulations:
Missouri Courts Scrutinize Employment Arbitration Agreements
Two recent Missouri Supreme Court decisions demonstrate Missouri courts will carefully scrutinize employment arbitration agreements in determining their validity. The Missouri Supreme Court in Baker v. Bristol Care, Inc., et al.1 invalidated an employment arbitration agreement that was agreed to by the parties at the time the employee was given a promotion and raise. The court held that continued employment for an at-will employee and mutual promises to arbitrate where the employer had the ability to modify the terms of the arbitration agreement did not constitute valid consideration to support the agreement. In State ex rel Hewitt v. The Honorable Kristine Kerr,2 the Missouri Supreme Court upheld an arbitration agreement, but held the arbitrator section provision unconscionable.
Puerto Rico Supreme Court: Former Exec Cannot Sue Individual Board Members for Breach of Employment Contract
A former employee cannot sue individual members of a corporation’s board of directors for breach of an employment contract and negligence in execution of fiduciary duties, where: 1) the individual board members are not parties to the employment contract; and 2) the employee and his relatives are not shareholders with standing to sue board members for alleged breach of fiduciary duty, the Puerto Rico Supreme Court has held. Randolfo Rivera San Feliz et al v. Junta de Directores de Firstbank Corporate et al., 2015 TSPR 61, 196 DPR ___ (2015).
Amendments to California’s Paid Sick Leave Law Have Been Enacted and Are Effective Immediately
This week, California’s Governor signed into law urgency legislation passed by the legislature (AB 304) to amend California’s recently enacted paid sick leave law. These amendments take effect immediately and are intended to clarify some areas of ambiguity in the law as originally enacted. While the amendments do provide clarification in some areas, they nonetheless create added confusion and burden for employers that have already adopted or modified paid time off policies to take effect July 1, 2015, based on their best interpretations of the paid sick leave law in its originally enacted form. The amendments also leave a number of ambiguities in the original law unanswered. Click on the link to read the full summary of the amendments.
Cheerleaders in California Have Something to Cheer About!
On July 15, Governor Jerry Brown signed into law AB 202, which requires California-based minor or major league sport teams in certain sports to treat cheerleaders as employees, not independent contractors.
Federal Court Split on Consideration Needed to Enforce a Restrictive Covenant in Illinois Remains Unresolved
On July 14, 2015, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit decided Instant Technology, LLC v. DeFazio.1 The decision was widely expected to address the current split in the Northern District of Illinois on whether two years or more of continued employment is required to enforce a restrictive covenant, absent additional consideration, as opined by the Illinois Appellate Court in Fifield v. Premier Dealer Services, Inc,2 However, the Seventh Circuit did not address this issue and instead ruled that the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding the restrictive covenants in controversy were unenforceable under the facts of that case.
North Carolina Reinforces Property Protection Law, Giving Employers Right to Sue
The protection of property, be it patient records, financial information, consumer data, merchandise, or intellectual property, is a serious issue for North Carolina companies of all sizes. Beginning on January 1, 2016, North Carolina employers will be able to recover monetary damages resulting from employees’ unauthorized access to and theft of their property.
New Jersey’s Conscientious “Everyone” Protection Act? State Supreme Court says “Yes”
Executive Summary: As we previously forecast and employers feared, New Jersey’s Supreme Court has dramatically expanded the state’s whistleblower law, the Conscientious Employee Protection Act or “CEPA.” In doing so, the Court held that so-called “watchdog” employees—who monitor, advise, or report to upper management concerning corporate conduct—may invoke the whistleblower protections of CEPA based upon the same consulting, advice, and reporting performed as part of their normal job functions. In rejecting more than a dozen appellate and federal cases dating back nearly a decade, the Court’s decision confirms that CEPA likely is the most far-reaching whistleblowing statute in the U.S.
Amendments to California Paid Sick Leave Law Effective
Significant amendments to California’s Healthy Workplaces, Healthy Families Act of 2014, also known as the California Paid Sick Leave Law, went into effect immediately upon Governor Jerry Brown’s signature on Assembly Bill no. 304 on July 13, 2015.
Connecticut Goes Beyond the NLRA, Prohibiting Employer Restrictions on Disclosure of Wages
While employers frequently attempt to restrict discussion among employees regarding pay, recent legislation in Connecticut prohibits employers from disciplining or otherwise retaliating against employees who discuss wage information.
Federal Judge Holds FAAAA Preempts a Critical Portion of the Massachusetts Independent Contractor Law
On July 8, 2015, a federal district court judge held that a section of the Massachusetts Independent Contractor law, as applied to same-day delivery services, is preempted by the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994 (FAAAA). This is a significant development because Massachusetts has one of the most stringent tests for satisfying independent contractor status in the country.