Thursday, May 22, 2008
Same-sex marriage in California
California has been one of the most active battlegrounds in the same-sex marriage debate. The fight began in earnest in 2000 when the state's voters passed Proposition 22, which defined marriage as the union between a man and a woman.
Four years later, the supreme court of the state of Massachusetts reached a conclusion that defining marriage as “between a man and a woman” and excluding same-sex couples is a violation of constitutional rights of privacy and equal protection under a proposed (but not enacted) Massachusetts law. The issue is also currently pending before the Connecticut Supreme Court.
In September 2005, the California Assembly became the first state legislature in the nation to proactively approve same-sex marriages. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger ultimately vetoed the bill on the basis of Proposition 22. Then the California Supreme Court began to consider whether Proposition 22 violates the state constitution's guarantee of equal protection under the law.
On May 15, 2008, the ban on same-sex marriage was overturned, making California the second state, behind Massachusetts, to allow full marriage rights for same-sex partners. Marriage licenses will be issued to same-sex couples starting on June 14, 2008.
For several years, California had already been providing legal protections, similar to those for which married couples are eligible, to same-sex domestic partnerships, granting "same-sex couples all state-level rights and obligations of marriage — in areas such as inheritance, income tax, insurance and hospital visitation"
In the most recent review, California laws limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples were deemed to violate same-sex couples' rights under the California Constitution. The Court explained that, "in view of the substance and significance of the fundamental right to form a family relationship, the California Constitution properly must be interpreted to guarantee this basic civil right to all Californians, whether gay or heterosexual, and to same-sex couples as well as to opposite-sex couples."
Because the Court found the exclusion is not justified, the decision will enable same-sex couples to be married in the eyes of the State of California. However, the Court's decision does not alter federal law or the marriage laws of other states.
The Court also evaluated the challenged marriage statutes under the Equal Protection clause of the California Constitution, concluding that the laws excluding same-sex couples from the definition of marriage do not discriminate on the basis of sex but discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation.
California businesses and employers must be alert. As same-sex couples begin to exercise their new right to marry under California law, discrimination against these individuals may subject employers and businesses to legal liability. Complaints of discrimination based on the exercise of the right to marriage by same-sex couples also should be taken seriously.
In addition, before this decision was issued, employment discrimination on the basis of marital status and registered domestic partner status were both already prohibited to the same extent in California, and the protections available to same-sex couples under these laws will remain the same. What is new is that same-sex couples can now claim the same protection via marriage as opposite-sex couples.
Finally, same-sex couples who were married in other jurisdictions that recognize same-sex marriage before this decision and then relocated to California will not presently be considered "married" and are not currently entitled to the protections or benefits available to married persons.
Four years later, the supreme court of the state of Massachusetts reached a conclusion that defining marriage as “between a man and a woman” and excluding same-sex couples is a violation of constitutional rights of privacy and equal protection under a proposed (but not enacted) Massachusetts law. The issue is also currently pending before the Connecticut Supreme Court.
In September 2005, the California Assembly became the first state legislature in the nation to proactively approve same-sex marriages. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger ultimately vetoed the bill on the basis of Proposition 22. Then the California Supreme Court began to consider whether Proposition 22 violates the state constitution's guarantee of equal protection under the law.
On May 15, 2008, the ban on same-sex marriage was overturned, making California the second state, behind Massachusetts, to allow full marriage rights for same-sex partners. Marriage licenses will be issued to same-sex couples starting on June 14, 2008.
For several years, California had already been providing legal protections, similar to those for which married couples are eligible, to same-sex domestic partnerships, granting "same-sex couples all state-level rights and obligations of marriage — in areas such as inheritance, income tax, insurance and hospital visitation"
In the most recent review, California laws limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples were deemed to violate same-sex couples' rights under the California Constitution. The Court explained that, "in view of the substance and significance of the fundamental right to form a family relationship, the California Constitution properly must be interpreted to guarantee this basic civil right to all Californians, whether gay or heterosexual, and to same-sex couples as well as to opposite-sex couples."
Because the Court found the exclusion is not justified, the decision will enable same-sex couples to be married in the eyes of the State of California. However, the Court's decision does not alter federal law or the marriage laws of other states.
The Court also evaluated the challenged marriage statutes under the Equal Protection clause of the California Constitution, concluding that the laws excluding same-sex couples from the definition of marriage do not discriminate on the basis of sex but discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation.
California businesses and employers must be alert. As same-sex couples begin to exercise their new right to marry under California law, discrimination against these individuals may subject employers and businesses to legal liability. Complaints of discrimination based on the exercise of the right to marriage by same-sex couples also should be taken seriously.
In addition, before this decision was issued, employment discrimination on the basis of marital status and registered domestic partner status were both already prohibited to the same extent in California, and the protections available to same-sex couples under these laws will remain the same. What is new is that same-sex couples can now claim the same protection via marriage as opposite-sex couples.
Finally, same-sex couples who were married in other jurisdictions that recognize same-sex marriage before this decision and then relocated to California will not presently be considered "married" and are not currently entitled to the protections or benefits available to married persons.
Labels: gender discrimination
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Minnesota Minimum Wage Veto Triggers Response From Worker Advocates
Last week, Governor Tim Pawlent vetoed legislation approved by both houses of the Minnesota Legislature that would have increased the state minimum wage from the current $6.15 per hour to $7.75 per hour in 2009. The state law would have provided a raise beyond federal minimum wage $7.25 next year.
More than 300,000 Minnesota jobs was paid less than Pawlenty vetoed $7.75. Kris Jacobs, director of the statewide JOBS NOW Coalition, said, "I don't think a total of $8 a week above the federal minimum wage for the rest of this year or $13 a week over the next year is too much to ask. Seven out of 10 Minnesotans agree. Twenty-eight states have higher minimum wages than Minnesota."
He also said a minimum wage increase is especially important for workers outside the Twin Cities metro area: although Greater Minnesota workers hold just 41 percent of the state's jobs, they hold 56 percent of the jobs that pay less than $7.75 per hour.
In a statement, the members of the coalition present their response to the veto that the Governor said the wage was too high, so they compromised by lowering the amount in both the first and second years. The Governor said he wanted to keep a sub-minimum wage for younger workers. They compromised by putting it back in the bill. The Governor argued that most restaurant servers earn more than the minimum wage, so they should be excluded from the increase.
"If only that were true," said Jacobs. "According to the Governor's own Department of Employment and Economic Development, the state median wage for servers (including tips) is $7.69 per hour. That's why a tip penalty for servers was the one thing we could not agree on."
More than 300,000 Minnesota jobs was paid less than Pawlenty vetoed $7.75. Kris Jacobs, director of the statewide JOBS NOW Coalition, said, "I don't think a total of $8 a week above the federal minimum wage for the rest of this year or $13 a week over the next year is too much to ask. Seven out of 10 Minnesotans agree. Twenty-eight states have higher minimum wages than Minnesota."
He also said a minimum wage increase is especially important for workers outside the Twin Cities metro area: although Greater Minnesota workers hold just 41 percent of the state's jobs, they hold 56 percent of the jobs that pay less than $7.75 per hour.
In a statement, the members of the coalition present their response to the veto that the Governor said the wage was too high, so they compromised by lowering the amount in both the first and second years. The Governor said he wanted to keep a sub-minimum wage for younger workers. They compromised by putting it back in the bill. The Governor argued that most restaurant servers earn more than the minimum wage, so they should be excluded from the increase.
"If only that were true," said Jacobs. "According to the Governor's own Department of Employment and Economic Development, the state median wage for servers (including tips) is $7.69 per hour. That's why a tip penalty for servers was the one thing we could not agree on."
Labels: Minnesota Minimum Wage
Friday, May 16, 2008
GINA—a newly passed act to protect employees against genetic discrimination
Employers will soon be prohibited from discriminating against individuals on the basis of their genetic information.
On April 24, 2008, the Senate unanimously passed the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) by a vote of 95 to 0. On May 1, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the same bill by a vote of 414 to 1.
Genetic tests are now regularly used to determine an individual's predisposition for diseases such as cystic fibrosis, breast and prostate cancer, diabetes, etc. As genetic testing has become more prevalent, the U.S. Congress has enacted GINA to address widespread concerns that genetic test results might be misused, especially in the health care and employment arenas.
The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) will protect individuals against discrimination based on their genetic information when it comes to health insurance and employment. It will make it illegal for employers to use individuals’ genetic information when making hiring, firing, job placement, or promotion decisions. It will also be illegal for insurance companies to deny or limit coverage, or charge a different rate or premium, to an otherwise healthy individual found to have a potential genetic condition or genetic predisposition towards a disease or disorder.
Thus, the bill will give comprehensive protection against all forms of genetic discrimination.
These protections are intended to encourage American individuals to take advantage, as part of their medical care, of genetic screening, counseling, and testing opportunities that will result from scientific advances in the field of genetics.
Legislation on genetic nondiscrimination that specifically addressed discrimination in health insurance was first introduced in the House of Representatives in 1995 but didn’t pass; similar bills failed to pass in the 104th, 105th and 106th congresses.
In 2002 during the 107th Congress, the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act was introduced. The bill addressed discrimination in both health insurance and employment decisions but did not pass. In the 108th and 109th congresses, it likewise failed to pass.
But this year Congress passed the Act, and president Bush has stated he will sign the GINA legislation if it comes before him. The employer provisions of the bill would then take effect in November 2009, after the U.S. Department of Labor has had an opportunity to enact implementing regulations.
On April 24, 2008, the Senate unanimously passed the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) by a vote of 95 to 0. On May 1, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the same bill by a vote of 414 to 1.
Genetic tests are now regularly used to determine an individual's predisposition for diseases such as cystic fibrosis, breast and prostate cancer, diabetes, etc. As genetic testing has become more prevalent, the U.S. Congress has enacted GINA to address widespread concerns that genetic test results might be misused, especially in the health care and employment arenas.
The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) will protect individuals against discrimination based on their genetic information when it comes to health insurance and employment. It will make it illegal for employers to use individuals’ genetic information when making hiring, firing, job placement, or promotion decisions. It will also be illegal for insurance companies to deny or limit coverage, or charge a different rate or premium, to an otherwise healthy individual found to have a potential genetic condition or genetic predisposition towards a disease or disorder.
Thus, the bill will give comprehensive protection against all forms of genetic discrimination.
These protections are intended to encourage American individuals to take advantage, as part of their medical care, of genetic screening, counseling, and testing opportunities that will result from scientific advances in the field of genetics.
Legislation on genetic nondiscrimination that specifically addressed discrimination in health insurance was first introduced in the House of Representatives in 1995 but didn’t pass; similar bills failed to pass in the 104th, 105th and 106th congresses.
In 2002 during the 107th Congress, the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act was introduced. The bill addressed discrimination in both health insurance and employment decisions but did not pass. In the 108th and 109th congresses, it likewise failed to pass.
But this year Congress passed the Act, and president Bush has stated he will sign the GINA legislation if it comes before him. The employer provisions of the bill would then take effect in November 2009, after the U.S. Department of Labor has had an opportunity to enact implementing regulations.
Labels: genetic discrimination
Monday, May 12, 2008
US Congress passes Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act
On May 1, 2008, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) by a 414-1 vote.
The bill is designed to protect workers against discrimination based on genetic information. Now the bill heads to the Congress and is expected to be signed into law by President Bush.
The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act was first proposed more than 13 years ago, in order pave the way for workers to take advantage of the promise of personalized medicine without fear of discrimination. At the time, fewer than 100 genetic tests existed; today, however, there are more than 1,200 genetic tests that are widely used for medical diagnoses, covering areas such as cancer, asthma, Alzheimer’s disease, and heart disease.
When the bill is signed into law, employers will not legally be allowed to ask employees for genetic information. It is also illegal to make employment decisions-- including hiring, firing, promotions, pay, training, status and working conditions -- based on genetic information.
The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act will be the first federal law to prohibit discrimination based on genetic information; some states already have similar statutes in place.
The bill is designed to protect workers against discrimination based on genetic information. Now the bill heads to the Congress and is expected to be signed into law by President Bush.
The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act was first proposed more than 13 years ago, in order pave the way for workers to take advantage of the promise of personalized medicine without fear of discrimination. At the time, fewer than 100 genetic tests existed; today, however, there are more than 1,200 genetic tests that are widely used for medical diagnoses, covering areas such as cancer, asthma, Alzheimer’s disease, and heart disease.
When the bill is signed into law, employers will not legally be allowed to ask employees for genetic information. It is also illegal to make employment decisions-- including hiring, firing, promotions, pay, training, status and working conditions -- based on genetic information.
The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act will be the first federal law to prohibit discrimination based on genetic information; some states already have similar statutes in place.
The minimum wage in Delaware is $7.15 per hour
Now the minimum wage of the state Delaware is $7.15 per hour.
The Minimum wage law is updated yearly and if the minimum wage in Delaware ever falls below the federal minimum then it is automatically replaced by the federal rate until the state minimum wage rises above the federal minimum.
On January 1, 2007, the first step of the increase went into effect, raising the minimum wage from $6.15 to $6.65 her hour. On January 1, 2008 the minimum wage increased again from $.6.65 per hour to $7.15 per hour.
The Delaware minimum wage applies to businesses with over 10 employees, but there are exceptions to the minimum wage rules. Businesses and organizations that are exempt include disabled workers, student learners, tipped employees, agricultural workers, domestic service providers, commissioned sales people, white collar executives and professionals, state inmates and volunteer workers. “Tipped” employees can be paid a minimum wage of $2.33 per hour. But if their total earnings are less than $7.15 an hour, their employers must make up the difference.
The Minimum wage law is updated yearly and if the minimum wage in Delaware ever falls below the federal minimum then it is automatically replaced by the federal rate until the state minimum wage rises above the federal minimum.
On January 1, 2007, the first step of the increase went into effect, raising the minimum wage from $6.15 to $6.65 her hour. On January 1, 2008 the minimum wage increased again from $.6.65 per hour to $7.15 per hour.
The Delaware minimum wage applies to businesses with over 10 employees, but there are exceptions to the minimum wage rules. Businesses and organizations that are exempt include disabled workers, student learners, tipped employees, agricultural workers, domestic service providers, commissioned sales people, white collar executives and professionals, state inmates and volunteer workers. “Tipped” employees can be paid a minimum wage of $2.33 per hour. But if their total earnings are less than $7.15 an hour, their employers must make up the difference.
Labels: minimum wage
Missouri’s Minimum Wage has increased to $6.65 per hour in 2008
Missouri's minimum wage has increased by 15 cents from $6.50 to a new rate of $6.65 per hour on January 1, 2008.
The minimum wage for tipped employees has also increased – from $3.25 per hour to $3.325 per hour. Employers must pay tipped employees at least 50 percent of the minimum wage.
Missouri Department of Labor and Industrial Relations must do study using the Consumer Price Index, and then determine the increases or decreases of the minimum wage for the coming year.
That initiative hiked the basic wage from $5.15 to $6.50 per hour in 2007 and the 2008 increase in the minimum wage was based on a 2.2 percent change in the Consumer Price Index between July 2006 and July 2007.The minimum wage law does not apply to retail or service businesses with annual sales of less than $500,000. All other businesses need to pay employees the minimum wage.
The minimum wage for tipped employees has also increased – from $3.25 per hour to $3.325 per hour. Employers must pay tipped employees at least 50 percent of the minimum wage.
Missouri Department of Labor and Industrial Relations must do study using the Consumer Price Index, and then determine the increases or decreases of the minimum wage for the coming year.
That initiative hiked the basic wage from $5.15 to $6.50 per hour in 2007 and the 2008 increase in the minimum wage was based on a 2.2 percent change in the Consumer Price Index between July 2006 and July 2007.The minimum wage law does not apply to retail or service businesses with annual sales of less than $500,000. All other businesses need to pay employees the minimum wage.
Labels: minimum wage
Sunday, May 11, 2008
Minnesota Minimum Wage Increase Is Now In Governor's Hands
House and Senate negotiators reached agreement on May, 8 that would increase the minimum wage for Minnesota’s lowest-paid workers.
Under the plan, for large employers (enterprise with annual receipts of $625,000 or more), the minimum wage would increase from $6.15 an hour to $6.75 per hour on July 24, 2008, and would increase again to $7.75 per hour in July of 2009. For smaller employers (enterprise with annual receipts of less than $625,000), the minimum wage would increase from $5.25 to $5.75 per hour on July 24, and up to $6.75 per hour in 2009.
“Without an increase in the minimum wage, many of our lowest-paid workers will soon find themselves unable to afford their basic necessities. I believe that this agreement takes a major step in the right direction, and will help thousands of our state’s residents cope with the challenges presented by our current economic downturn,” said Sen. Ellen Anderson, DFL-St. Paul, who carried the measure in the Senate.
The House and Senate agreement also increases the state’s training wage from $4.90 to $5.35 per hour in July, and increase to $5.75 per hour in 2009, while reducing the maximum age to receive a training wage down to 17.
Minnesota’s current minimum wage of $6.15 per hour for large employers has fallen below many Midwestern neighbors, including Iowa ($7.25), Illinois ($6.50, increasing to $7.50 in July), Wisconsin ($6.50), and Michigan ($7.15, increasing to $7.40 in July).
The state’s current minimum wage also ranks lowest among the 31 states that have enacted minimum wages above the federal minimum.
Labels: Minnesota Minimum Wage
Friday, May 09, 2008
Michigan Minimum Wage Will Increase to $7.40 in July 2008
The state of Michigan will increase its minimum wage from $7.15 per hour to $7.40 per hour, effective July 1, 2008, 25 cents higher than 2007. For tipped workers, the wage remains at $2.65 per hour.
Businesses can pay the young workers 85 percent of the adult minimum wage, a youth sub-minimum wage. The sub-minimum wage will be increased from $6.08 per hour to $6.29 per hour on July 1, 2008.
The state minimum wage covers employers who employ two or more persons, 16 years of age or older, and also covers some certain employees in federally-covered businesses.
If an employee is covered by both the state minimum and the federal minimum, the worker is entitled to the higher one. In Michigan, almost every employee is entitled to the state minimum wage because state minimum wage is higher than the federal rate.
Businesses can pay the young workers 85 percent of the adult minimum wage, a youth sub-minimum wage. The sub-minimum wage will be increased from $6.08 per hour to $6.29 per hour on July 1, 2008.
The state minimum wage covers employers who employ two or more persons, 16 years of age or older, and also covers some certain employees in federally-covered businesses.
If an employee is covered by both the state minimum and the federal minimum, the worker is entitled to the higher one. In Michigan, almost every employee is entitled to the state minimum wage because state minimum wage is higher than the federal rate.
Thursday, May 08, 2008
VFCP—a program to help benefit employers
In recent years, the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) has given employers instructions and provided them information about how to comply with federal benefits laws. At the same time, it also set rules on how employers must manage their employee retirement and benefit plans. Generally speaking, employers who violate these rules will fines and penalties. Employer utilization of the “VFCP” is one way to reduce or eliminate the risk of such adverse consequences.
The Voluntary Fiduciary Correction Program (VFCP) is designed to encourage employers to voluntarily comply with the ERISA by self-correcting certain violations of the law. Many workers can benefit from the program as a result of the increased retirement security associated with restoration of plan assets and payment of additional benefits.
Participating in VFCP can save employers a large amount of money in taxes, fees and penalties. Any employer who may be liable for fiduciary violations under ERISA may be eligible to use VFCP, giving them an opportunity to identify and correct problems and certain violations of the law with employee benefit accounts. However, companies must completely and accurately correct all violations, as well as provide proof that the violations were all corrected; those who don’t may still be subject to enforcement actions, including civil penalties, according to ERISA Sections 502 (I) and 502 (i).
The VFCP was begun in 2002 and was expanded in 2006. Now Employers can correct their past errors in 19 categories of transactions.
“The VFCP is an effective strategy in protecting the pension benefits of America’s workers,” said Billy Beaver, director of the ERISA’s San Francisco Regional Office. “Through this voluntary program, EBSA helps employers resolve issues related to employee benefit plans that they sponsor.”
The Voluntary Fiduciary Correction Program (VFCP) is designed to encourage employers to voluntarily comply with the ERISA by self-correcting certain violations of the law. Many workers can benefit from the program as a result of the increased retirement security associated with restoration of plan assets and payment of additional benefits.
Participating in VFCP can save employers a large amount of money in taxes, fees and penalties. Any employer who may be liable for fiduciary violations under ERISA may be eligible to use VFCP, giving them an opportunity to identify and correct problems and certain violations of the law with employee benefit accounts. However, companies must completely and accurately correct all violations, as well as provide proof that the violations were all corrected; those who don’t may still be subject to enforcement actions, including civil penalties, according to ERISA Sections 502 (I) and 502 (i).
The VFCP was begun in 2002 and was expanded in 2006. Now Employers can correct their past errors in 19 categories of transactions.
“The VFCP is an effective strategy in protecting the pension benefits of America’s workers,” said Billy Beaver, director of the ERISA’s San Francisco Regional Office. “Through this voluntary program, EBSA helps employers resolve issues related to employee benefit plans that they sponsor.”
Labels: Compliance Issues
Wednesday, May 07, 2008
Maine Will Increase Minimum Wage To $7.25 On October 1, 2008
Maine State Governor John E. Baldacci signed LD 1697 on April 17 that will increase the minimum wage from the current $7 per hour to $7.25 per hour, effective October 1, 2008, and increase to $7.50 per hour on October 1, 2009.
The Governor said this legislation makes sure that wages in Maine keep pace with the rest of New England.
“We need to make sure we do everything we can to reward work,” said Governor Baldacci. “Maine men and women should be able to earn a living wage so they can support their families. There is no safety net better than a job with benefits.”
The Governor also said, “this is an important step, and it’s another in a series of efforts that they have joined together on to ensure all Maine people have access to good paying jobs and a brighter future.”
The Governor said this legislation makes sure that wages in Maine keep pace with the rest of New England.
“We need to make sure we do everything we can to reward work,” said Governor Baldacci. “Maine men and women should be able to earn a living wage so they can support their families. There is no safety net better than a job with benefits.”
The Governor also said, “this is an important step, and it’s another in a series of efforts that they have joined together on to ensure all Maine people have access to good paying jobs and a brighter future.”
Labels: ME minimum wage
Sunday, May 04, 2008
Texas Workforce Commission Collects Nearly $10 Million in Unpaid Wages
The state of Texas recovered $9.9 million in unpaid wages on behalf of workers in 2006 and 2007.
The Texas Workforce Commission collected the back wages through its enforcement of the Texas Payday Law, which requires private employers to provide workers with earned compensation in a timely manner.
"Texans who have not been paid for work have a true resource in the Texas Workforce Commission," says Larry Temple, executive director of the Texas Workforce Commission. "Services from our Labor Law Section are at no-cost to the worker, and we work aggressively to collect unpaid wages once we determine wages are due."
Texas Workforce Commission Labor Law investigators annually conduct more than 15,000 wage claim investigations across the state.
TWC also makes presentations to employer organizations, education service centers and workforce boards to educate the public about the Texas Payday Law, the Texas Child Labor Law and the Texas Minimum Wage Act.
Labels: Texas Compensation Law
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
US DOL Announces 125 Million Grants for Workers
According to the U. S. Department of Labor, 69 community colleges and community-based institutions that competed successfully under the President’s Community-Based Job Training Grants Initiative in 36 states have been awarded $125 million in grants within the past few weeks to support training programs for high-growth job sectors.
The grants, known as Community-Based Job Training Grants, are intended to build the capacity of such institutions to train workers to develop the skills for local industries and occupations that are expected to see strong growth, as well as for industries where the demand for qualified workers is already exceeding the supply.
The institutions chosen will use the funds to prepare students for careers in high-growth industries. Awardees were chosen from among 341 applications received in response to a competition announced August 8, 2007. The program was established in 2005 and awarded 72 grants in its first year. The second round of awards, made in 2006, totaled 70 grants.
Secretary of Labor Elaine L. Chao said, “Community colleges are in a unique position to prepare local workers for careers in high-growth industries. The $125 million awarded today will expand enrollment in education and training programs and provide more workers with the skills they need to succeed.”
The focus of the Community-Based Job Training Grants is to build community colleges’ capacity to equip workers with the skills required to succeed in local industries and to fortify the role that community colleges play in advancing the potential of America’s workforce.
The grants, known as Community-Based Job Training Grants, are intended to build the capacity of such institutions to train workers to develop the skills for local industries and occupations that are expected to see strong growth, as well as for industries where the demand for qualified workers is already exceeding the supply.
The institutions chosen will use the funds to prepare students for careers in high-growth industries. Awardees were chosen from among 341 applications received in response to a competition announced August 8, 2007. The program was established in 2005 and awarded 72 grants in its first year. The second round of awards, made in 2006, totaled 70 grants.
Secretary of Labor Elaine L. Chao said, “Community colleges are in a unique position to prepare local workers for careers in high-growth industries. The $125 million awarded today will expand enrollment in education and training programs and provide more workers with the skills they need to succeed.”
The focus of the Community-Based Job Training Grants is to build community colleges’ capacity to equip workers with the skills required to succeed in local industries and to fortify the role that community colleges play in advancing the potential of America’s workforce.
Labels: DOL
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Texas Child Labor Law
The Texas Labor Code states that “the purpose of the Texas Child Labor Law is to ensure that a child is not employed in an occupation or manner that is detrimental to the child's safety, health, or well-being.”
The code defines a “Child” as any individual under 18 years of age. However, except as specifically authorized by the statute, it is illegal to employ a child under 14 years of age.
The Texas State Law also states that a child of 14 or 15 years of age may not work more than eight hours per day or more than 48 hours each week. If a child of 14 or 15 is enrolled in a public or private school, he may not work between the hours of 10 p.m. and 5 a.m. If a child of 14 or 15 is not enrolled in summer school, he may not work between the hours of midnight and 5 a.m. on any day that school is in recess for the summer.
The code defines a “Child” as any individual under 18 years of age. However, except as specifically authorized by the statute, it is illegal to employ a child under 14 years of age.
The Texas State Law also states that a child of 14 or 15 years of age may not work more than eight hours per day or more than 48 hours each week. If a child of 14 or 15 is enrolled in a public or private school, he may not work between the hours of 10 p.m. and 5 a.m. If a child of 14 or 15 is not enrolled in summer school, he may not work between the hours of midnight and 5 a.m. on any day that school is in recess for the summer.
Labels: Texas Child Labor
Monday, April 14, 2008
Elaws Advisor—a Poster Advisor to help in your business
Every business must display a variety of posters to comply with the poster requirements of several labor laws administered by the state and federal government; posters required for different businesses are also different. This is where elaws Advisors can help.
The elaws Advisor is a kind of interactive e-tool that can simulate the interaction you might have with an employment law expert. It will ask you a series of questions, evaluate your responses and provide a list of posters that you should display.
Each Advisor will also provide links to more detailed information you may find useful, and to DOL contact information for each poster in case of you wish to speak with a DOL representative about a particular issue or case that can’t be determined by the Advisor.
Advisor only provides information about Federal DOL poster requirements; you can contact your State Department of Labor to get information about the requirements for your state.
In addition, the Advisor does not provide posters that may be required for certain businesses. Certain types of posters can only be obtained from the DOL's Office of Workers' Compensation Programs (OWCP), including notices to employees that the employer is insured or self-insured to provide compensation benefits to its employees or eligible survivors in the case of work-related injury, illness or death.
Employers covered by the following statutes must obtain this insurance:
--Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act
--Defense Base Act (covers employees on overseas military, air, or naval bases under a public works contract performed by contractors with agencies of the U.S. Government)
--Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (covers employees of firms working on the outer continental shelf of the U. S. engaged in exploration for and development of natural resources)
--Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentalities Act (covers civilian employees in post exchanges, service clubs, etc. of the Armed Forces)
You may contact the Office of Workers' Compensation Programs if you are not sure about whether you are covered under one of the above statutes.
The elaws Advisor is a kind of interactive e-tool that can simulate the interaction you might have with an employment law expert. It will ask you a series of questions, evaluate your responses and provide a list of posters that you should display.
Each Advisor will also provide links to more detailed information you may find useful, and to DOL contact information for each poster in case of you wish to speak with a DOL representative about a particular issue or case that can’t be determined by the Advisor.
Advisor only provides information about Federal DOL poster requirements; you can contact your State Department of Labor to get information about the requirements for your state.
In addition, the Advisor does not provide posters that may be required for certain businesses. Certain types of posters can only be obtained from the DOL's Office of Workers' Compensation Programs (OWCP), including notices to employees that the employer is insured or self-insured to provide compensation benefits to its employees or eligible survivors in the case of work-related injury, illness or death.
Employers covered by the following statutes must obtain this insurance:
--Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act
--Defense Base Act (covers employees on overseas military, air, or naval bases under a public works contract performed by contractors with agencies of the U.S. Government)
--Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (covers employees of firms working on the outer continental shelf of the U. S. engaged in exploration for and development of natural resources)
--Nonappropriated Fund Instrumentalities Act (covers civilian employees in post exchanges, service clubs, etc. of the Armed Forces)
You may contact the Office of Workers' Compensation Programs if you are not sure about whether you are covered under one of the above statutes.
Labels: DOL
Sunday, April 13, 2008
Texas Workers’ Compensation Law
In Texas, workers’ compensation is not a mandatory state program that requires business employers to have insurance policies covering employees for job-related injuries.
However, employers who choose not to accept the provisions of this program will lose the right to assert certain defenses if they are accused. So, employers must give notice to their employees whether they are covered by workers’ compensation insurance.
Texas is the only state in which the employer may optionally purchase workers’ compensation insurance. Employers may choose between providing worker’s compensation coverage, or being subject to a civil suit in the case of worker injury. Worker's compensation insurance may be provided by a private insurance carrier, a competitive state fund, or the business employers may self-insure. In any case, the Texas Workers Compensation law will protect injured workers from any unlawful acts by their employers following an injury.
However, employers who choose not to accept the provisions of this program will lose the right to assert certain defenses if they are accused. So, employers must give notice to their employees whether they are covered by workers’ compensation insurance.
Texas is the only state in which the employer may optionally purchase workers’ compensation insurance. Employers may choose between providing worker’s compensation coverage, or being subject to a civil suit in the case of worker injury. Worker's compensation insurance may be provided by a private insurance carrier, a competitive state fund, or the business employers may self-insure. In any case, the Texas Workers Compensation law will protect injured workers from any unlawful acts by their employers following an injury.
Labels: Texas Compensation Law
Monday, April 07, 2008
Ohio Military Status Updated
The state of Ohio has updated their Fair Employment law, adding “Military Status” as a new protective category effective March 23, 2008.
Ohio Governer Ted Strichland has signed into law the Ohio Veterans Package, Substitute House Bill 372. Ohio’s Anti Discrimination law now includes “military status” as a protected class for purposes of employment, housing, and public accommodations. Already included as protected classes under Ohio law are race, color, sex, disability, national origin, age (40& older), ancestry and religion.
“Military status” refers to a person’s status in “service in the uniformed services.” “Service in the uniformed services” means the performance of duty in a uniformed service under competent authority, including active duty, active duty for training, initial active duty for training, inactive duty for training, full-time national guard duty and performance of duty or training by a member of the Ohio organized militia in accordance with the Revised Code.
The federal Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) already protects military service, but the new Ohio amendments broaden this protection. Ohio employers will now need to include “military status” as a protected category on their Fair Employment labor law postings; the state is in the process of updating and releasing new fair employment law postings as of this writing, on 4/7/08.
Ohio Governer Ted Strichland has signed into law the Ohio Veterans Package, Substitute House Bill 372. Ohio’s Anti Discrimination law now includes “military status” as a protected class for purposes of employment, housing, and public accommodations. Already included as protected classes under Ohio law are race, color, sex, disability, national origin, age (40& older), ancestry and religion.
“Military status” refers to a person’s status in “service in the uniformed services.” “Service in the uniformed services” means the performance of duty in a uniformed service under competent authority, including active duty, active duty for training, initial active duty for training, inactive duty for training, full-time national guard duty and performance of duty or training by a member of the Ohio organized militia in accordance with the Revised Code.
The federal Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) already protects military service, but the new Ohio amendments broaden this protection. Ohio employers will now need to include “military status” as a protected category on their Fair Employment labor law postings; the state is in the process of updating and releasing new fair employment law postings as of this writing, on 4/7/08.
Labels: Ohio Military Status
Sunday, March 30, 2008
Paid Sick Leave May Become California Statewide
On February 27, on the steps of San Francisco City Hall, Assemblywoman Fiona Ma introduced Assembly Bill 2716 (“AB 2716”) which, if passed, would make California the first state in the nation to require employers to provide sick leave benefits to their employees when they are sick or need time to take care of their sick family members. The bill is modeled after a San Francisco law that requires the city's employers to offer paid sick leave. The SF law, the first of its kind in the nation, went into effect last February.
Under AB 2716, any employee who works in California for 7 or more days in a calendar year would be entitled to paid sick time, which would accrue at a rate of at least one hour for every thirty hours worked, and no employee could be discriminated against for requesting sick leave. Most employers would be able to limit an employee's use to nine days in each calendar year, and small businesses with a maximum of ten workers would be allowed to limit annual paid sick days to five days. Sick time would carry over from year to year, and an employee would be entitled to use accrued sick time beginning on the 90th calendar day of employment.
Under Ma’s bill, paid sick days could be used to cover diagnosis, care, or treatment of health conditions of the employee; they could also be used to care for a sick family member or to recover from a domestic violence or sexual assault.
"Nobody wins when people have to go to work sick," Ma said. "This is just the right thing to do. We here in California want to make sure that when they are sick they do not have to worry about losing their jobs, they do not have to worry about losing a day’s pay.” Right now, nearly six million working Californians have no paid sick days through their employers. That’s approximately 40 percent of the state’s workforce, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
The bill was only recently introduced and it is difficult to determine if it will be passed through the Legislature, and whether its form and requirements will change along the way. However, voters would likely support such a law, according to sponsors, who cited a University of California, Los Angeles poll that shows 88 percent of California adults surveyed "agreed or agreed strongly that there should be a law guaranteeing paid sick days for all California workers."
If passed, the law would make California the first state in the country to guarantee paid sick days. Maine, Massachusetts, Ohio and Washington DC, are also considering similar legislation, according to Ma's office.
Under AB 2716, any employee who works in California for 7 or more days in a calendar year would be entitled to paid sick time, which would accrue at a rate of at least one hour for every thirty hours worked, and no employee could be discriminated against for requesting sick leave. Most employers would be able to limit an employee's use to nine days in each calendar year, and small businesses with a maximum of ten workers would be allowed to limit annual paid sick days to five days. Sick time would carry over from year to year, and an employee would be entitled to use accrued sick time beginning on the 90th calendar day of employment.
Under Ma’s bill, paid sick days could be used to cover diagnosis, care, or treatment of health conditions of the employee; they could also be used to care for a sick family member or to recover from a domestic violence or sexual assault.
"Nobody wins when people have to go to work sick," Ma said. "This is just the right thing to do. We here in California want to make sure that when they are sick they do not have to worry about losing their jobs, they do not have to worry about losing a day’s pay.” Right now, nearly six million working Californians have no paid sick days through their employers. That’s approximately 40 percent of the state’s workforce, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
The bill was only recently introduced and it is difficult to determine if it will be passed through the Legislature, and whether its form and requirements will change along the way. However, voters would likely support such a law, according to sponsors, who cited a University of California, Los Angeles poll that shows 88 percent of California adults surveyed "agreed or agreed strongly that there should be a law guaranteeing paid sick days for all California workers."
If passed, the law would make California the first state in the country to guarantee paid sick days. Maine, Massachusetts, Ohio and Washington DC, are also considering similar legislation, according to Ma's office.
Labels: Paid Sick Leave Bill
Monday, March 17, 2008
New Family Medical Leave Act Has Been Updated January 28th, 2008
The New Family Medical Leave Act titled Military Family Leave Notice has been signed into law H.R. 4986, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (NDAA) by President Bush, and became effective January 28, 2008
This new law provides eligible employees working for covered employers two important new leave rights related to military service:
(1) Eligible employees are entitled to up to 12 weeks of leave for any qualifying exigency arising out of the covered family member’s active duty,
(2) Eligible employees are entitled up to 26 weeks of leave in a single 12-month period to care for the covered service member who is recovering from a serious illness or injury. The employee is entitled to a combined total of 26 weeks of all types of FMLA leave.
The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) only applies to employers who employ 50 or more employees for each working day in the current or previous year. (The 50 employee threshold includes both full-time employees and part-time employees.)
This notice is strictly informational only and is NOT the final version of the revised Family Medical Leave poster. After review of the new law is complete, the current FMLA poster, titled “Your Rights under the Family and Medical Leave of 1993” will be revised by the responsible federal agency; that revision will become available sometime between April and July of 2008.
This new law provides eligible employees working for covered employers two important new leave rights related to military service:
(1) Eligible employees are entitled to up to 12 weeks of leave for any qualifying exigency arising out of the covered family member’s active duty,
(2) Eligible employees are entitled up to 26 weeks of leave in a single 12-month period to care for the covered service member who is recovering from a serious illness or injury. The employee is entitled to a combined total of 26 weeks of all types of FMLA leave.
The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) only applies to employers who employ 50 or more employees for each working day in the current or previous year. (The 50 employee threshold includes both full-time employees and part-time employees.)
This notice is strictly informational only and is NOT the final version of the revised Family Medical Leave poster. After review of the new law is complete, the current FMLA poster, titled “Your Rights under the Family and Medical Leave of 1993” will be revised by the responsible federal agency; that revision will become available sometime between April and July of 2008.
Labels: FMLA
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Montana’s Minimum Wage has increased in 2008
The minimum wage in Montana increased by 11 cents, from $6.15 to $6.25 per hour effective January 1, 2008
Under Initiative 151， adjustments are required to the minimum wage to be calculated before September 30 of each year based upon any increase in the U.S. City Average CPI for All Urban Consumers for All Items from August of the preceding year to August of the year in which the calculation is made. Based on an increase in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) of 1.97% from August 2006 to August 2007, the calculation used for determining the minimum wage for 2008 is $6.15 X .0197 -- $0.1211, rounded to $0.10.
Tipped employees must be paid the full minimum wage of $6.25 per hour in Montana. Businesses with revenues less than $110,000 per year in sales can still pay employees $4.00 per hour.
On July 24, 2008 the federal minimum wage will increase by 70 cents from $5.85 to $6.55 per hour, witch is higher than 2008 Montana minimum wage of $6.25 so the state minimum wage will also increase to $6.55 per hour then.
Under Initiative 151， adjustments are required to the minimum wage to be calculated before September 30 of each year based upon any increase in the U.S. City Average CPI for All Urban Consumers for All Items from August of the preceding year to August of the year in which the calculation is made. Based on an increase in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) of 1.97% from August 2006 to August 2007, the calculation used for determining the minimum wage for 2008 is $6.15 X .0197 -- $0.1211, rounded to $0.10.
Tipped employees must be paid the full minimum wage of $6.25 per hour in Montana. Businesses with revenues less than $110,000 per year in sales can still pay employees $4.00 per hour.
On July 24, 2008 the federal minimum wage will increase by 70 cents from $5.85 to $6.55 per hour, witch is higher than 2008 Montana minimum wage of $6.25 so the state minimum wage will also increase to $6.55 per hour then.
Nevada’s Minimum Wage will increase to $7.03 per hour in 2008
On July 1, 2008, 70 cents (the difference between the old and new federal minimum wage) will be added to both Nevada minimum wages. This will cause the lower Nevada wage to rise to $6.00 (with a plan) and $7.03 (without a plan).
On July 1, 2009, the minimum wage in the state of Nevada will increase again, to $6.70 (with plan) and $7.73 (without plan).
Nevada’s minimum wages will continue to increase annually. Any adjustment to the state minimum wages will take effect on July 1 of that year.
Minimum wage of Nevada, along with that of Arizona, Colorado, Missouri, Montana, and Ohio will be adjusted by inflation annually, and in Nevada, the minimum must also remain at least $1 above the federal rate.
Nevada is also one of the seven states (along with Alaska, California, Minnesota, Montana, Oregon and Washington) that require employers to pay tip workers the same minimum wage as other workers.
On July 1, 2009, the minimum wage in the state of Nevada will increase again, to $6.70 (with plan) and $7.73 (without plan).
Nevada’s minimum wages will continue to increase annually. Any adjustment to the state minimum wages will take effect on July 1 of that year.
Minimum wage of Nevada, along with that of Arizona, Colorado, Missouri, Montana, and Ohio will be adjusted by inflation annually, and in Nevada, the minimum must also remain at least $1 above the federal rate.
Nevada is also one of the seven states (along with Alaska, California, Minnesota, Montana, Oregon and Washington) that require employers to pay tip workers the same minimum wage as other workers.
Labels: minimum wage
New Hampshire’s Minimum Wage will increase to $7.25 in 2008
The minimum wage in New Hampshire will increase to $7.25 per hour on September 1, 2008.
On September 1, 2007, the minimum wage in the state of New Hampshire increased form the original $5.85 per hour to $6.50 per hour after a decade without a raise. But that was only the first step of the minimum wage increase plan in that state according to the law signed by the New Hampshire’s Governor John Lynch on May 3, which marked the first New Hampshire minimum wage increase since 1997. The other step is to increase the minimum wage for many of the state's hourly workers from $6.50 per hour to $7.25 per hour on September 1,2008. The minimum wage is automatically replaced with the Federal minimum wage rate if it is higher than the State minimum wage rate.
On September 1, 2007, the minimum wage in the state of New Hampshire increased form the original $5.85 per hour to $6.50 per hour after a decade without a raise. But that was only the first step of the minimum wage increase plan in that state according to the law signed by the New Hampshire’s Governor John Lynch on May 3, which marked the first New Hampshire minimum wage increase since 1997. The other step is to increase the minimum wage for many of the state's hourly workers from $6.50 per hour to $7.25 per hour on September 1,2008. The minimum wage is automatically replaced with the Federal minimum wage rate if it is higher than the State minimum wage rate.
Labels: minimum wage
Massachusetts’ Minimum Wage Increased To $8.00 Per Hour In 2008
The state of Massachusetts has increased its minimum wage from $7.50 per hour to $8.00 per hour, 50 cents’ increases per hour, effective January 1, 2008.
With this increase, Massachusetts has become the state of the second highest minimum wage in the country in 2008, following the state of Washington which minimum wage is $8.07 per hour.
The new minimum wage does not apply to all employees. For those tipped employees, they could receive the minimum wage of $2.63 per hour; and for agricultural workers, $1.60 per hour’s minimum wage could be paid.
However, according to the Massachusetts Legislature, further minimum wage increases will be necessary in the near future for the annual cost of living adjustments because of the real purchasing power.
With this increase, Massachusetts has become the state of the second highest minimum wage in the country in 2008, following the state of Washington which minimum wage is $8.07 per hour.
The new minimum wage does not apply to all employees. For those tipped employees, they could receive the minimum wage of $2.63 per hour; and for agricultural workers, $1.60 per hour’s minimum wage could be paid.
However, according to the Massachusetts Legislature, further minimum wage increases will be necessary in the near future for the annual cost of living adjustments because of the real purchasing power.
Labels: Massachusetts Minimum Wage
Sunday, February 17, 2008
Ohio’s Minimum Wage Increased to $7 Per Hour
The Ohio Department of Commerce had calculated the inflation adjusted Ohio minimum wage for 2008. Beginning on January 1, 2008, the Ohio’s minimum wage for non-tipped employees increased from $6.85 by 2 percent, which equals to 15 cents, to $7 per hour and from $3.43 per hour to $3.50 per hour for tipped employees.
The constitutional amendment passed by voters in November 2006 states that Ohio’s minimum wage shall increase on January 1 of each year by the rate of inflation. The increase is tied to the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for urban wage earners and clerical workers for the prior 12-month period as of September 30.
The increased minimum wage will apply to employers who gross more than $255,000 per year. Currently, Ohio’s minimum wage applies to employers who gross over $250,000 per year.
The constitutional amendment passed by voters in November 2006 states that Ohio’s minimum wage shall increase on January 1 of each year by the rate of inflation. The increase is tied to the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for urban wage earners and clerical workers for the prior 12-month period as of September 30.
The increased minimum wage will apply to employers who gross more than $255,000 per year. Currently, Ohio’s minimum wage applies to employers who gross over $250,000 per year.
Labels: minimum wage
New Mexico’s Minimum Wage Has Increased To $6.5 Per Hour
On January 1, 2008 the New Mexico state minimum wage has increased by 65 cents from $5.85 per hour to $6.50 per hour, which will increase again to $7.50 an hour on January 1, 2009. This is the second increase of minimum wage within 6 months in New Mexico. On July 24, 2007, the state minimum wage increased with the federal rate, from $5.15 per hour to $5.85 per hour. Thus, the total increase in New Mexico will reach $1.35 per hour, which is the largest in any state in 2008.
However, the increase of minimum wage does not apply to agricultural employees and tipped employees. Although the federal rate for tipped employees is $2.13 per hour and that in other states is somewhere from $2.23 to $8.07 per hour, the minimum wage for tipped employees in New Mexico remains one of the lowest rates in the nation, that is just $2.125 per hour.
However, the increase of minimum wage does not apply to agricultural employees and tipped employees. Although the federal rate for tipped employees is $2.13 per hour and that in other states is somewhere from $2.23 to $8.07 per hour, the minimum wage for tipped employees in New Mexico remains one of the lowest rates in the nation, that is just $2.125 per hour.
Labels: minimum wage
Vermont's minimum wage has increased to $7.68 per hour
The minimum wage in Vermont has increased to $7.68 per hour from $7.53 per hour on January 1, 2008. The Vermont minimum wage law is set to increase every year at the same rate as the August Consumer Price Index (CPI)。
On January 1, 2008 the state minimum wage for tipped employees (who are working in the hotel, motel, tourist place and restaurant industry and can receive tips) has also increased, from $3.65 to $3.72 per hour – an increase of 7 cents. But if the tipped employees’ total earnings is less than $7.68 an hour, their employers must make up the difference between $3.72 per hour and $7.68 per hour in the tips they get from their customers.
On January 1, 2008 the state minimum wage for tipped employees (who are working in the hotel, motel, tourist place and restaurant industry and can receive tips) has also increased, from $3.65 to $3.72 per hour – an increase of 7 cents. But if the tipped employees’ total earnings is less than $7.68 an hour, their employers must make up the difference between $3.72 per hour and $7.68 per hour in the tips they get from their customers.
Labels: minimum wage
Washington’s minimum wage has increased to $8.07 per hour
Washington’s hourly minimum wage has increased from $7.93 to $8.07, effective January 1st, 2008. According to the law, the state minimum wage must be adjusted each year complying with the change in the federal Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W) during the 12 months ending each August 31.
The CPI-W is a national index covering the cost of goods and services needed for day-to-day living. This year, it increased 1.8 percent in the period and led to a 14-cent increase in next year's minimum wage, which equals to an increase from current $7.93 per hour to $8.07 per hour.
The CPI-W is a national index covering the cost of goods and services needed for day-to-day living. This year, it increased 1.8 percent in the period and led to a 14-cent increase in next year's minimum wage, which equals to an increase from current $7.93 per hour to $8.07 per hour.
Labels: minimum wage
Sunday, February 03, 2008
Iowa’s Minimum Wage Increased to $7.25 Per Hour in 2008
The state of Iowa has increased their minimum wage from $6.20 per hour to $7.25 per hour effective January 1, 2008.
The increase in the state minimum wage was approved by the Iowa Legislature and signed by Gov. Chet Culver last January.
Iowa’s lowest paid workers has gotten an increase of $2.10 per hour in the past year. For the tipped wait workers, their pay also increased from $1.26 an hour to $4.35 an hour with both pay increases last year.
Nearly 18 percent Iowans, mainly food service and retail workers, will benefit from the increase. Tom Shockley, one of the local businessman, said the biggest local impact will be to young workers 14 to 16 years old.
The increase in the state minimum wage was approved by the Iowa Legislature and signed by Gov. Chet Culver last January.
Iowa’s lowest paid workers has gotten an increase of $2.10 per hour in the past year. For the tipped wait workers, their pay also increased from $1.26 an hour to $4.35 an hour with both pay increases last year.
Nearly 18 percent Iowans, mainly food service and retail workers, will benefit from the increase. Tom Shockley, one of the local businessman, said the biggest local impact will be to young workers 14 to 16 years old.
Labels: Iowa minimum wage
Strive For Increase In Alaska’s Minimum Wage
At the Capitol of Alaska, some lawmakers are striving for increasing the minimum wage of the workers of the lowest pay.
The federal government will increase the federal minimum wage from $6.55 per hour to $7.25 per hour nationwide effectively July 24, 2009. Juneau’s lone senator, Kim Elton, sponsored the bill of raising the minimum wage to which is higher than the federal minimum wage: $8 or an hour minimum wage for keeping pace with the inflation.
Elton said there are about 14,000 Alaskan workers earning a minimum wage. “That is especially difficult because Juneau is one of the more expensive cities in Alaska, so the challenges they face are great,” he said.
The federal government will increase the federal minimum wage from $6.55 per hour to $7.25 per hour nationwide effectively July 24, 2009. Juneau’s lone senator, Kim Elton, sponsored the bill of raising the minimum wage to which is higher than the federal minimum wage: $8 or an hour minimum wage for keeping pace with the inflation.
Elton said there are about 14,000 Alaskan workers earning a minimum wage. “That is especially difficult because Juneau is one of the more expensive cities in Alaska, so the challenges they face are great,” he said.
Elton said he understood the concerns of the business community, but still thought the wage increase was necessary.
Labels: Alaska Minimum Wage
Florida’s Minimum Wage Increased to $6.79 Per Hour In 2008
The state of Florida has increased their minimum wage from $6.67 per hour to $6.79 per hour effective January 1, 2008. Florida’s lowest paid workers could get a slight increase of 12 cents per hour.
For a full-time job worker, the hourly 12 cents minimum wage increase means an increase of 1.8 percent annually over last year. For tipped employees, like restaurant servers, the minimum wage is also increased 12 cents and to the current $3.77 per hour.
The new state minimum wage increases in accordance with the consumer price. And the minimum wage only applies to those workers who are entitled to receive the federal minimum wage under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Labels: FL Minimum Wage
New Jersey’s Minimum Wage Should Be Increased to $8.25 Per Hour
The state of New Jersey’s current minimum wage is $7.15 per hour and it should be increased to $8.25 per hour. The minimum wage will increase annually in accordance with the increase in the cost of living and keep pace with inflation, a state commission has recommended.
The minimum wage increase would need the approval of the Legislature and Gov. Jon S. Corzine. According to the U.S. Department of Labor, the minimum wage in New Jersey would be the highest in the nation.
New Jersey would be the 11th state to increase the minimum wage based on inflation rates. The states, such as Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, Ohio, Oregon, Vermont and Washington, already have such a policy.
Labels: New Jersey Minimum Wage
Florida’s Consumer Confidence Drops
The consumer confidence drops in December to the lowest level of 74 in more than five years in Florida. The jobs increased slowly in the state of Florida.
The economic report released by the state Agency for Workforce Innovation shows that the ranks of the unemployed statewide have increased 33.8% since last year, that’s 100,000. About one third of the unemployed spread in West Palm Beach, Broward and Miami-Dade counties.
The state unemployment rate was 4.3 percent last month, 0.1 percent higher than October. Florida has a lower jobless rate than the nation, which had a 4.7 percent unemployment rate in November. And now, umemployment is beginning to spread to banks, mortagage companies and other financial services.
The economic report released by the state Agency for Workforce Innovation shows that the ranks of the unemployed statewide have increased 33.8% since last year, that’s 100,000. About one third of the unemployed spread in West Palm Beach, Broward and Miami-Dade counties.
The state unemployment rate was 4.3 percent last month, 0.1 percent higher than October. Florida has a lower jobless rate than the nation, which had a 4.7 percent unemployment rate in November. And now, umemployment is beginning to spread to banks, mortagage companies and other financial services.
Labels: FL Minimum Wage
California’s Minimum Wage Has Increased to $8.00 Per Hour in 2008
The state of California has increased their minimum wage from $7.50 per hour to $8.00 per hour effective January 1, 2008. California has been the highest state minimum wage in the nation apart from the state of Massachusetts.
"This wage increase will benefit more than 1.4 million hard-working Californians. With this increase, we are demonstrating the value we attach to the work these employees provide to our state and its dynamic economy," said Department of Industrial Relations Director John Duncan.
The minimum wage increase also affects the hourly base rate of pay for workers in the computer software information technology industries. The hourly base rate effective Jan. 1, 2008 will be $36.
Labels: CA Minimum Wage
Colorado’s Minimum Wage Increased to $7.02 Per Hour in 2008
The state of Colorado has increased their minimum wage from $6.85 per hour to $7.02 per hour, effective January 1, 2008. The minimum wage will adjust in accordance with the increase of employees’ minimum wage and follow this, effective January 1, 2009. The state Department of Labor and Employment released the news.
In addition, the minimum wage for tipped employees, such as waiters in restaurants, has also increased from the wage of $3.83 per hour to $4 per hour.
"We're just giving a heads-up to businesses that the minimum wage will be going up. Many of them may not realize that minimum wage, which rose to $6.85 from $5.15 on Jan. 1, 2007, will be going up again in 2008," said Bill Thoennes, spokesman for the state labor department.
Labels: CO Minimum Wage
Monday, September 24, 2007
Oregon's Minimum Wage
Oregon's minimum wage, already among the nation's highest, will go up 15 cents to $7.95 an hour beginning in January 1st, 2008, announced on Wednesday by Dan Gardner, Oregon Labor Commissioner. That's two dollars more than the federal minimum wage, which is $5.85 and also slightly above the minimum wage in Washington State, which is $7.93.
The increase equals to about $30 more every month. Dan Gardner said “What you can do with $30 a month, if you’re a single mother for instance, is buy your kid a pair of shoes and a winter coat. And that’s what it amounts to to the worker.” Oregon's minimum wage law makes sure the workers with low income keep pace with the rising cost of living.
The increase follows passage of a 2002 ballot measure, which tied the wage to the Consumer Price Index, a measure of inflation. Oregon must recalculate the wage annually in September.
Recently the Congress raised the minimum wage to $5.85 per hour and states across the nation also have pushed up their minimum wages. About 17 states even have minimum wages higher than the federal rate.
Dan Gardner said that the 15 cents increase would make Oregon's minimum wage the third highest in the nation, slightly behind California and Massachusetts' minimums wage of $8 an hour. He also said that the state of Washington's minimum wage, currently at $7.93 per hour also is linked to the cost of living and is expected to remain the highest in the nation in 2008.
Labels: oregon minimum wage
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
Central Florida Taco Bell provides training to employees after settling a harassment suit
A male employee of a Taco Bell in Polk County, who was sexually harassed by a female manager, will be paid $76,050 to settle his suit, the EEOC announced on August 14, 2007 .
This employee said he had been subjected to repeat physical and verbal sexual harassment, and he left the company after management took his complaints as jokes.
Taco Bell was also required to train all of its employees in Central Florida on its sexual harassment policies and to make semi-annual reports to the EEOC on any harassment complaints it receives.
Labels: sexual harassment
Justice Department Sues Spartanburg County for Alleged Sex Discrimination
On Aug 14, 2007, The Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against Spartanburg County, South Carolina, alleging that the county discriminated against a county employee for her sex, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The government's complaint advocates that the county discriminated against the employee during her employment by the county's Department of Roads and Bridges as a senior sign technician. They put her into sexual harassment, thus created a hostile work environment, and they failed to take appropriate action to remedy the discrimination. The employee is no longer employed by the county.
In its complaint, the government now seeks, among other things, compensation to the employee for the county's discriminatory conduct as well as the implementation of county policies to address and prevent sexual harassment.
Labels: sexual harassment
Mena Restaurant Settles sexual-harassment lawsuit
EEOC announced this week that a Mena-based Sonic Drive-In restaurant and its holding company agreed to pay $75,000 to settle a sexual-harassment lawsuit filed last year .
This lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court, Western District of Arkansas in Fort Smith on May 2006. In this case, two women were subjected to sexual harassment by a night manager in the period of their employment at the Sonic. One of the women was a teenager at the time.
Sexual harassment violates Title 7 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Investment Holdings Inc. will pay totally $75,000 to the two female employees.
In addition, Mena SDI, doing business as Sonic Drive-In, will conduct training for all of its employees in order to prevent sexual harassment and retaliation, it also will post a notice reinforcing the company's policies on Title 7. All new employees will accept a similar training when hired, and the company will provide a copy of its sexual harassment policy to all employees.
Labels: sexual harassment
Friday, August 10, 2007
R＆G FOODS WAS FINED FOR CHILD LABOR VIOLATION
On Tuesday,The U.S. Department of Labor announced that it has fined R&G Foods, the owner of Rex's Foodland grocery, $24,750 for allowing 20 children, some even as young as 15, to load and operate a paper baling machine which the department thought to be dangerous equipment. it is only can be operated by adults.
A manager was called by telephone at the grocery said Tuesday she was unaware of the fines, refused to give her name and hung up.
An investigation also found two workers under 16 worked longer hours than allowed.
teenagers may not work more than three hours on school days and eight hours on non-school days.
The grocery in Chapel Hill, about 40 miles south of Nashville, advocates on its Web site it aims to provide job opportunities for adults and "teens still in school that are interested in learning the business."
Labels: child labor
Fines for worker misclassification
A new law means fines for construction companies that inappropriately classify workers as independent contractors instead of regular employees, a practice condemned by labor unions because they say it deprives workers of benefits such as worker's compensation and unemployment.
"Misclassification of employees as independent contractors is one of the chief devices that greedy employers use to cheat workers out of their benefits," one official said.
Other states have addressed worker misclassification and Illinois is one of at least five states to pass a law.
Violations can cost a company up to $2,500.
Labels: unemployment insurance, worker's compensation
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
Companies Pay More Than $1 Million in Back Wages
Stonington Behavioral Health Inc. and its parent companies have been ordered to pay more than $1 million in back wages to 143 employees and a $49,156 in civil penalties to resolve violations of FLSA overtime requirements.
Stonington Behavioral Health Inc. in North Stonington, doing business as Stonington Institute, and Pennsylvania-based parent companies Universal Health Services Inc. and UHS of Delaware Inc. were accused of paying employees less than the federal minimum and overtime wages.
Under the investigation, full-time employees who worked with substance-abuse patients routinely worked unpaid, unrecorded hours.
The companies will pay a total of $1,075,218 in back wages for the period between July 1, 2004, and July 1, 2006. The back wage payments must be made no later than Sept. 5, 2007. The companies also have paid $49,156 in civil monetary penalties.
Stonington Behavioral Health Inc. in North Stonington, doing business as Stonington Institute, and Pennsylvania-based parent companies Universal Health Services Inc. and UHS of Delaware Inc. were accused of paying employees less than the federal minimum and overtime wages.
Under the investigation, full-time employees who worked with substance-abuse patients routinely worked unpaid, unrecorded hours.
The companies will pay a total of $1,075,218 in back wages for the period between July 1, 2004, and July 1, 2006. The back wage payments must be made no later than Sept. 5, 2007. The companies also have paid $49,156 in civil monetary penalties.
Labels: back wages, DOL, FLSA
