Workforce Bulletin

Employment issues to consider while awaiting decision in Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization

The United States Supreme Court (“SCOTUS”) will imminently release its decision in Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization, and if the final ruling is consistent with the recently-leaked draft opinion (overturning Roe v Wade and Planned Parenthood v Casey), employers may soon need to contend with a variety of novel employment and benefits related issues. Some employers have already begun to consider and plan for a post-Roe workplace. Those who have not would be wise to do so now, to best ensure a well-coordinated and thoughtful approach.

For example, some employers have publicly announced plans to provide expanded healthcare benefits, travel, lodging and other benefits to employees who may seek abortion-related services in states where those medical services will be prohibited or limited.  These benefits raise complex legal issues applicable to employers’ group health plans and fringe benefit plans, including conflicts between federal and state law, federal ERISA preemption and potential employer civil and/or criminal liability for providing these benefits.

As featured in #WorkforceWednesday:  This week, we take a look at the federal government’s recently announced focus on mental health.

On May 25, 2022, the U.S. Department of Labor announced that the Wage and Hour Division (WHD) published new Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) Guidance. The newly issued Fact Sheet #280 explains when eligible employees may take FMLA leave to address mental health conditions, and new Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) offer explanations on how to address various scenarios that employers and employees could face in which use of job-protected leave available under the FMLA would be appropriate.

Reviewing FMLA Basics

Although the FMLA covers public and private employers nationwide, only those private employers who have 50 or more employees for at least 20 workweeks in a year are required to provide their eligible employees with FMLA leave. FMLA leave is unpaid but job-protected, meaning that employees returning from FMLA leave must be restored to their original job or equivalent position. Employees are eligible once they have worked for a covered employer for at least 12 months and logged at least 1,250 hours of work during the period immediately preceding leave, which may be taken for an employee’s own serious health condition or to care for a spouse, child, or parent because of their serious health condition.

As featured in #WorkforceWednesday:  This week, we look at a range of recent anti-harassment and gender equity updates from across the country.

For the second time this spring, a California statute designed to promote diversity in corporate boardrooms was blocked by a state judge. On May 13, 2022, in Crest v. Padilla I (Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. 19STCV27561) (Crest), Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Maureen Duffy-Lewis ruled that California Corporations Code Section 301.3 (SB 826), which requires publicly listed corporations in California to have women on their boards, violates the Equal Protection Clause of California’s Constitution. California Secretary of State Shirley N. Weber has since announced plans to appeal the decision, stating that “SB 826 was passed not to remove men from the boardroom, but simply to make room for highly qualified women who have been excluded from the corporate board selection process for decades.”

Over the past several years, workplace artificial intelligence (“AI”) tools have matured from novel to mainstream.  Whether facilitating attracting, screening, hiring, and onboarding job applicants or charting the career path or promotability of current employees, workplace AI tools will likely become more prevalent.  Legislators and administrative agencies have taken note and are in various stages of examining and regulating these tools, with the primary goal of ensuring that they do not violate federal and state laws prohibiting workplace discrimination.

As featured in #WorkforceWednesday: This week, we focus on compliance and transparency when using artificial intelligence (AI) tools in employment decision-making.

As featured in #WorkforceWednesday:  This week, we look at updated regulations in California and New York City and at the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL).

On Thursday, May 12, 2022, New York City Mayor Adams signed the bill (previously described here) amending New York City’s new law that requires employers to list wage or salary ranges on job advertisements. Most significantly, among other changes, the amendment pushes the effective date of the law from May 15, 2022, to November 1, 2022.

Where is the impact of alleged employment discrimination? That is the question when evaluating whether a remote worker can assert claims under the New York State Human Rights Law (“NYSHRL”) and New York City Human Rights Law (“NYCHRL”), according to a recent decision by U.S. District Judge Edgardo Ramos. Relying on state law, Judge Ramos concluded that the basis for subject matter jurisdiction has not changed during the COVID-19 pandemic and remains grounded in New York’s “Impact Test,” meaning courts will look to where the impact of alleged discriminatory conduct was felt. Thus, regardless of whether an employer is located in New York, the anti-discrimination laws are intended to protect employees who live or work in New York.

As featured in #WorkforceWednesday:  This week, we examine best practices for crafting flexible work arrangement policies. Requests to continue working remotely or with flexibility remain high as we emerge from the COVID-19 pandemic.

Employees who resign from work, sue their employer, and assert “constructive discharge” shoulder a heavy burden to demonstrate that they had no choice but to resign. A recent decision of the Massachusetts Appeals Court, Armato v. Town of Stoneham, shows just how heavy that burden is.

As featured in #WorkforceWednesday:  This week, we’re breaking down recent local- and state-level developments impacting compliance for employers.

Since 2019, the Illinois Lodging Services Human Trafficking Recognition Training Act (820 ILCS 95/, “the Act”) has required Illinois lodging establishments (such as hotels, motels, and casino hotels) to provide employees with training on how to recognize human trafficking and protocols for reporting suspected human trafficking to authorities.  Recent amendments, which became effective January 1, 2022, have ostensibly expanded the scope of covered employers to include other businesses that serve transient populations:  restaurants and truck stops.

On April 28, 2022, the New York City Council (the “Council”) approved an amendment to a recently enacted pay transparency law, 2022 Local Law 32 (the “Law”) by an overwhelming majority. The Law will require employers to disclose salary ranges in advertisements for jobs that are performed, at least in part, in New York City, and was set to become effective on May 15, 2022. After significant pushback from the business community, the Council introduced a new bill, Int. No. 134-A (the “Amendment”), to offer additional clarity and time for employers to comply. The Amendment is expected to be signed into law by Mayor Eric Adams. Of greatest immediate significance, once signed, the Amendment delays the effective date of the Law from May 15 to November 1, 2022.

The Amendment clarifies that advertisements for any job, promotion or transfer opportunity will have to include a statement of either a minimum and maximum annual salary or the minimum and maximum hourly wage. The Law will apply to advertisements seeking both exempt employees who earn a salary, and non-exempt employees, who may be paid on a salary or hourly basis.

As featured in #WorkforceWednesday:  This week, we look at the increase in mental health discrimination charges the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) recently reported and how employers can respond.

A California Superior Court judge has invalidated state legislation that required boards of publicly held corporations headquartered in California to include a minimum number of directors from underrepresented communities.  The court’s decision effectively strikes down Assembly Bill No. 979 (“AB 979”), a law enacted with the goal of increasing diversity on boards of directors, paving the way for a parallel outcome to a similar challenge of a statutory mandate for increased gender diversity on boards of directors.

Promotion of “Underrepresented Communities” Struck Down

As featured in #WorkforceWednesday:  This week, we update you on two major developments from the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB” or “Board”) and this year’s abridged timeline to submit EEO-1 data.

As featured in #WorkforceWednesday:  This week, we look at the increased focus on non-compete agreements across the country.

As featured in #WorkforceWednesday:  This week, we look at compliance and enforcement developments at the federal level and in the specific jurisdictions of New York City and California.

Employers take note: the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (“SJC”) ruled this week for an employee seeking treble damages for untimely paid wages under the Massachusetts Wage Act (“Wage Act”), even though the employer had corrected its mistake and paid the wages before the employee filed suit. Writing for the majority in Reuter v. City of Methuen, Justice Scott L. Kafker interpreted the “strict time-defined payment policies” and liquidated damages provisions under the Wage Act to find that the employer was responsible for treble the amount of late wages, and not treble the amount of interest, even though the wages were ultimately paid before the complaint was filed. This underscores the importance of paying all wages, including vacation or PTO in a timely fashion.

On March 28, 2022, the New York City Commission on Human Rights released official guidance (Guidance) regarding the upcoming pay transparency law, Int. 1208-B (Law), which requires all advertisements for jobs, promotions, and transfer opportunities for positions performed in the City to include a minimum and maximum salary range.  As we previously reported, the City Council passed the Law on December 15, 2021, and it currently is expected to take effect on May 15, 2022.

In addition, amendments to the Law have recently been introduced in the New York City Council (T2022-5021 (Bill)) which, if passed, will modify the Law in important ways, including delaying its effective date and further clarifying its requirements.

On March 28, 2022, District of Columbia Mayor Muriel Bowser signed D.C. Act 24-350, postponing the applicability date of the Ban on Non-Compete Agreements Amendment Act of 2020 (D.C. Act 23-563) (the “Act”) until October 1, 2022.  As we previously reported, the D.C. Council will likely use the coming months to consider various amendments, which will hopefully offer clarity to employers.

As featured in #WorkforceWednesday:  This week, we look at the additional guidance the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) recently issued regarding caregivers.

As featured in #WorkforceWednesday:  This week, we look at a range of developments shifting the enforcement approach across federal agencies and how employers can comply with these shifts.

Employers in New York State should be aware of recent new laws as well as some pending bills, all of which seek to bolster harassment and discrimination protections for employees.  As detailed below, New York Governor Kathy Hochul recently signed several bills into law that expand harassment and discrimination protections, while the New York Senate recently passed more bills that would further bolster safeguards for employees and independent contractors in the state.

On March 14, 2022, the EEOC issued a technical assistance document, The COVID-19 Pandemic and Caregiver Discrimination Under Federal Employment Discrimination Laws, which provides guidance as to ways equal employment opportunity laws enforced by the EEOC (“EEO laws”) may apply to caregivers. In conjunction with this, the EEOC added a Section I (“Caregivers/Family Responsibilities”)  to “What You Should Know About COVID-19…,” its primary COVID-19 related guidance document. Enforcement guidance issued by the EEOC in 2007, previously addressed circumstances in which discrimination against caregivers might constitute unlawful disparate treatment. The EEOC has issued this new guidance in response to how the COVID-19 pandemic has particularly affected employees with caregiver responsibilities.

As featured in #WorkforceWednesday:  This week, we look at how employers can make adjustments to their benefits policies to assist employees who want to offer help and support to Ukraine.

Next month, New Jersey private employers will need to start informing drivers before using GPS tracking devices in the vehicles they operate. A new state law that becomes effective April 18, 2022, requires employers to provide written notice to employees before using “electronic or mechanical devices” that are “designed or intended to be used for the sole purpose of tracking the movement of a vehicle, person, or device.” The notification requirement applies to both employer-owned or -leased and personal vehicles.

As featured in #WorkforceWednesday:  This week, we’re looking at how employment laws and regulations are being impacted by the Biden administration’s recent actions on the international and national stages.

On March 3, 2022, President Biden, as expected, signed the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021 (“Act”) into law. As we previously explained, the Act amends the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) to make pre-dispute arbitration agreements for sexual assault and sexual harassment claims invalid and unenforceable. Parties remain free, however, to mutually agree to arbitration after a claim has been asserted. The new law delegates any disputes regarding the Act, including as to the arbitrability of claims, to the courts, and not an arbitrator, to decide.

While the fate of two COVID-19 vaccination rules by federal agencies were decided in January by the Supreme Court of the United States, millions of employees working for the federal government, whether directly or as a contractor, have been waiting for clarity in the wake of court orders halting Presidential efforts to promote vaccination.  Here is a brief update on the status of litigation challenging the extent of the President’s authority to command the Executive Branch.

The D.C. Council (the “Council”) is poised to further postpone the Ban on Non-Compete Agreements Amendment Act of 2020 (D.C. Act 23-563) (the “Act”). On March 1, 2022, Councilmember Elissa Silverman introduced emergency legislation (B24-0683) that would push back the Act’s applicability date from April 1 to October 1, 2022. Councilmember Silverman simultaneously introduced and the D.C. Council adopted an emergency declaration resolution (PR24-0603) allowing the measure to proceed directly to Mayor Muriel Bowser’s desk for signing after a single reading.

As featured in #WorkforceWednesday:  This week, we look at H.R. 4445, new federal legislation that addresses mandatory arbitration of sexual assault and harassment claims.

As featured in #WorkforceWednesday:  This week, we focus on new developments increasing whistleblower protections across the country and prohibiting mandatory arbitration of sexual assault and harassment claims.

A bill that will prohibit mandatory arbitration of sexual assault and sexual harassment claims is on its way from the House and Senate to President Biden for his signature.  It appears likely that the President will sign the bill, given that a statement issued by the President’s Office earlier this month states that the “Administration supports” passage of the bill.

As featured in #WorkforceWednesday: This week, we’re recapping major items shifting at the state, local, and federal levels, including whistleblower retaliation case law, pay transparency rules, and federal labor policies.

On January 27, 2022, the California Supreme Court, in Lawson v. PPG Architectural Finishes, Inc. (Cal., Jan. 27, 2022) __ P.3d __, 2022 WL 244731, clarified the evidentiary standard for presenting and evaluating retaliation claims under California Labor Code Section 1102.5 (“section 1102.5 whistleblower retaliation claim”).   Lawson involved a workplace retaliation claim brought by a sales representative selling paint products to home improvement stores in Southern California. The plaintiff claimed his employer terminated him because he complained about being instructed to alter the tint of certain paint colors to avoid having to repurchase less popular paints from the retailer later.

In 2003, California lawmakers enacted Labor Code Section 1102.6, setting forth a framework for whistleblower retaliation claims that varied from the burden-shifting test established by the United States Supreme Court in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green (1973) 411 U.S. 792 (“McDonnell Douglas”).  Despite section 1102.6’s enactment, some California courts continued to apply the McDonnell Douglas test to section 1102.5 whistleblower retaliation claims.

On January 26, 2022, the City and County of San Francisco released an updated Health Order No. C19-07y (the “Updated Health Order”), which addresses a number of rules issued in an effort to combat continued spread of COVID-19, including changes in exemptions to the universal indoor mask mandate.  Specifically, effective February 1, 2022, the Updated Health Order renews a previously-suspended masking exemption for vaccinated workplaces, with a few significant changes.

First, under the revised mask exemption, only employees who are “Up to Date” on vaccination (see below for definition) may go unmasked in the workplace, assuming the other conditions for the exemption are met.  Other individuals must wear masks at all times, subject to limited exceptions (e.g., alone, while eating).  Further, consistent with the Cal/OSHA definition of an outbreak, this exemption only applies if there have been no outbreaks (currently defined as three or more COVID-19 cases in an “exposed group” within a 14-day period) in the past 30 days.

As featured in #WorkforceWednesday: This week, we’re focusing on what employers can expect from the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in 2022.

New Yorkers who employ of domestic workers should note two recent amendments to the New York State Human Rights Law (“NYSHRL”) that went into effect on December 31, 2021, which together extend full protection of the NYSHRL to individuals employed in domestic service in New York.  In addition, beginning on March 12, 2022, employment protections afforded by the New York City Human Rights Law (“NYCHRL”) will apply to all domestic workers.

The first amendment to the state law removed language from the definition of “employee” under section 292(6), which had previously excluded domestic workers from most of the NYSHRL’s protections. Now, the only category of persons excluded from the definition of “employee” are those individuals employed by their parents, spouse, or child. The second amendment repealed section 296-b, which had protected domestic workers from harassment, but not other types of discrimination.