Nowadays genetic testing becomes more and more prevalent. The number grew from fewer than 100 thirteen years ago to 1200 today. It has long been a concern that employers would use the genetic information to weed out employees with potential health problems.
Signed into law in May 2008, the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) prohibits discrimination by health insurers and employers based on people's genetic information. Under GINA, it is illegal for employers to make job decisions such as hiring, firing, pay, training, working conditions, status, raises, promotions, etc. based on genetic information. Just like it is illegal to discriminate on the basis of age, sex, religion and other factors, it is illegal to discriminate on the basis of genetic information.
On Feb 25 2009, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) presented a Notice of Proposed Rule Making implementing employment provisions of GINA and opened a 60-day public comment period until April 25, 2009 at www.eeoc.gov.
Susannah Baruch, Law and Policy Director of the Pew Genetics and Public Policy Center at Johns Hopkins University, said that "With the passage of GINA and its implementation, we welcome a new era. There are many factors an individual may consider in deciding whether to take a genetic test, but the fear of discrimination must not be one of them."
Francis S. Collins, M.D., PhD, head of the Human Genome Research Institute, said that the law would protect everyone with DNA, and thanks to the new law, no one needs to fear that their DNA “is going to be used against them”.
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Take a lesson from Starbucks class action
Recently a class action by Starbucks’ employees gives a wake-up call to all employers. Employers have to pay attention to the topic of travel expenses.
This class action occurs as Starbucks fail to reimburse employees for their travel expenses.
Jonelle Lewis, the lead plaintiff, worked in a retail management position at a Starbucks in California Amador County community of Martell. She had worked in the company one and half years. During her employment, she regularly used her personal vehicle to do job-related work. She had asked the company several times for mileage expenses, but was denied by the excuse that the company had no such policy.
The class action included more or less 6000 Starbucks’ retail managers who had the same experience as Jonelle Lewis. At last, Starbucks paid more than three million dollars to settle the class action.
According to California Labor Code section 2802, it is imperative for employers to indemnify its employees for expenses they had spent for the work. Of course, travel expenses are included.
It is important to know that employees have the right to get incurred expenses if he uses his own vehicle for business purposes, including running an errand for business reasons.
The outcome of the Starbucks case should encourage employers to review their travel expense policies.
Hence the following important tips for employers: Review the company handbook; ensure that it provides that all workers are reimbursed for travel expenses; implement procedures for employees to claim and receive reimbursement for travel and other expenses.
This class action occurs as Starbucks fail to reimburse employees for their travel expenses.
Jonelle Lewis, the lead plaintiff, worked in a retail management position at a Starbucks in California Amador County community of Martell. She had worked in the company one and half years. During her employment, she regularly used her personal vehicle to do job-related work. She had asked the company several times for mileage expenses, but was denied by the excuse that the company had no such policy.
The class action included more or less 6000 Starbucks’ retail managers who had the same experience as Jonelle Lewis. At last, Starbucks paid more than three million dollars to settle the class action.
According to California Labor Code section 2802, it is imperative for employers to indemnify its employees for expenses they had spent for the work. Of course, travel expenses are included.
It is important to know that employees have the right to get incurred expenses if he uses his own vehicle for business purposes, including running an errand for business reasons.
The outcome of the Starbucks case should encourage employers to review their travel expense policies.
Hence the following important tips for employers: Review the company handbook; ensure that it provides that all workers are reimbursed for travel expenses; implement procedures for employees to claim and receive reimbursement for travel and other expenses.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
How to Manage a Diverse Workforce
Employers in various industries ranging from high tech to agriculture have known that they face a potential labor shortage. It is reported that the labor shortage will be particularly acute in the area of skilled labor.
As a result, employers have to employ persons who used to work in other industries. Then the traditional misunderstanding about employees should work in the same industry confronts with challenge. For example, employees in the hospital industry are not supposed to skip to other areas.
However it is not to say that we should encourage people to skip their work for this industry to another. It is a reminder that people in your organization may differ in background and experience. A diverse workforce is one which improves productivity by affording all employees a positive work environment and opportunity to advance within an organization.
As an employer who has employees with multi-experience, one should do as follows:
Set strict rules about non-discrimination in the workplace.
Have a clear idea about what qualifications are needed for a certain position and make sure the each person has the right job based on quality rather than his experience.
Post your job listing advertisements in newspapers that have a diverse audience so that you reach new candidates in different communities
Monitor regularly efforts you have made and determine what activities have played a positive role in diverse workforce;
Showcase diversity in your annual report, on your website, and in every opportunity to communicate with the public.
Form your own corporate culture. As your employees come from different areas, they have been educated or cultivated in their particular ways; you must have your own corporate culture to pull them together.
As a result, employers have to employ persons who used to work in other industries. Then the traditional misunderstanding about employees should work in the same industry confronts with challenge. For example, employees in the hospital industry are not supposed to skip to other areas.
However it is not to say that we should encourage people to skip their work for this industry to another. It is a reminder that people in your organization may differ in background and experience. A diverse workforce is one which improves productivity by affording all employees a positive work environment and opportunity to advance within an organization.
As an employer who has employees with multi-experience, one should do as follows:
Set strict rules about non-discrimination in the workplace.
Have a clear idea about what qualifications are needed for a certain position and make sure the each person has the right job based on quality rather than his experience.
Post your job listing advertisements in newspapers that have a diverse audience so that you reach new candidates in different communities
Monitor regularly efforts you have made and determine what activities have played a positive role in diverse workforce;
Showcase diversity in your annual report, on your website, and in every opportunity to communicate with the public.
Form your own corporate culture. As your employees come from different areas, they have been educated or cultivated in their particular ways; you must have your own corporate culture to pull them together.
Thursday, March 05, 2009
D.C. Mandatory Sick Leave Rules
The controversial Accrued Sick and Safe Leave Act of 2008 have been effective in 2008 in the District of Columbia. Recently, this new act requires employers to provide mandatory paid sick leave.
The new law mandates that paid sick leave for any absences must be given to all the eligible employees working in the D.C. area. No matter mental or physical illnesses, employees must be given the paid sick leave. Also, employees must be given paid time off for what is called preventative medical care or for family care.
Recently, the DOES (D.C. Department of Employment Services) released the details to clarify some of the details of the proposed new Accrued Sick and Safe Leave Act. That may also help end some of the confusion surrounding the legislation.
Eligible workers must also have accumulated one year of continuous service and a minimum of 1,000 hours of work during the previous 12-month period. Workers were unable to start using the sick leave until February 11, 2009.
The new law mandates that paid sick leave for any absences must be given to all the eligible employees working in the D.C. area. No matter mental or physical illnesses, employees must be given the paid sick leave. Also, employees must be given paid time off for what is called preventative medical care or for family care.
Recently, the DOES (D.C. Department of Employment Services) released the details to clarify some of the details of the proposed new Accrued Sick and Safe Leave Act. That may also help end some of the confusion surrounding the legislation.
Eligible workers must also have accumulated one year of continuous service and a minimum of 1,000 hours of work during the previous 12-month period. Workers were unable to start using the sick leave until February 11, 2009.
Tuesday, March 03, 2009
Start Out 2009 Right With This Employment Law
2009 is a big year as there are many amendments to employment laws; for example, the amendment to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the new family and Medical Leave Act (FML) regulations, and the anticipated passage of the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA). In order to keep with the pace, you must bear the following in mind.
1. Actions to ADA amendment
The new amendments to ADA make it easier for employees to make disability discrimination claims, but harder for employers to defeat these claims. So it is necessary for employers to take active action. First, they should review and update the policies and practices regarding the ADA’s interactive dialogue process. Then employers should record the following: when an employee requests an accommodation, the accommodations denied and/or provided, written documentation for the decisions that are made, and if it requires immediate attention. Last but not least, it is very important for employers to refresher training of HR professional and line management based on the new ADA requirements.
2. Actions to FMLA amendment
As the new FMLA became into effect on January 16, 2009, all employers are supposed to revise FMLA policy and regulations accordingly.
To comply with the changes, you should make the following considerations:
Consider updating your rules on return-to-work certification to take advantage of the new employer rights.
Consider whether to change your rules about the use of paid leave to take advantage of the new flexibility.
Consider whether to begin tighter enforcement of abuse notification rules and procedures.
3. Actions to EFCA
Although the EFCA is not finally released, Non-Union employers still need to make preparation, and they put themselves in a position to launch their union-free campaigns before a union targets them for a card signing campaign.
1. Actions to ADA amendment
The new amendments to ADA make it easier for employees to make disability discrimination claims, but harder for employers to defeat these claims. So it is necessary for employers to take active action. First, they should review and update the policies and practices regarding the ADA’s interactive dialogue process. Then employers should record the following: when an employee requests an accommodation, the accommodations denied and/or provided, written documentation for the decisions that are made, and if it requires immediate attention. Last but not least, it is very important for employers to refresher training of HR professional and line management based on the new ADA requirements.
2. Actions to FMLA amendment
As the new FMLA became into effect on January 16, 2009, all employers are supposed to revise FMLA policy and regulations accordingly.
To comply with the changes, you should make the following considerations:
Consider updating your rules on return-to-work certification to take advantage of the new employer rights.
Consider whether to change your rules about the use of paid leave to take advantage of the new flexibility.
Consider whether to begin tighter enforcement of abuse notification rules and procedures.
3. Actions to EFCA
Although the EFCA is not finally released, Non-Union employers still need to make preparation, and they put themselves in a position to launch their union-free campaigns before a union targets them for a card signing campaign.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Stimulus Plan Includes COBRA Subsidy
Obama administration’s stimulus plan offered COBRA subsidies and was signed into law on February 17, 2009. Many employers have questions about the subsidies. The subsidy applies beginning March 1, 2009.
The ARRA (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009) included a provision to subsidize extended health insurance coverage under COBRA for some eligible employees. These eligible employees referred to as “assistance eligible individual” (AEI) is laid off through no fault of his or her own, or is a dependent of a laid-off employee.
According to the ARRA, the COBRA subsidy does not apply to flexible spending accounts. The maximum time for each assistance eligible individual is nine months. Employee can get 35 percent of the COBRA premium. Every AEI qualifies for the subsidy. However, according to the individual tax returns, high-income individuals and their spouses will be required to repay the subsidy.
If the AEI does qualify as a high-income individual her or she may waive the subsidy voluntarily and must pay 100 percent of the COBRA premium.
The ARRA (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009) included a provision to subsidize extended health insurance coverage under COBRA for some eligible employees. These eligible employees referred to as “assistance eligible individual” (AEI) is laid off through no fault of his or her own, or is a dependent of a laid-off employee.
According to the ARRA, the COBRA subsidy does not apply to flexible spending accounts. The maximum time for each assistance eligible individual is nine months. Employee can get 35 percent of the COBRA premium. Every AEI qualifies for the subsidy. However, according to the individual tax returns, high-income individuals and their spouses will be required to repay the subsidy.
If the AEI does qualify as a high-income individual her or she may waive the subsidy voluntarily and must pay 100 percent of the COBRA premium.
New Oregon Food Server Break Law
Recently, BOLI (Bureau of Labor and Industries) updated the state meal break regulations. The Oregon BOLI issued new regulations that food servers can opt to waive their unpaid meal breaks, but not their paid rest breaks. Tipped food service workers in Oregon who are over 18 years of age may opt out of their required 30-minute meal breaks if they like.
According to the new regulations, employers cannot require an employee to waive breaks, or force employees to do so. Either the employer or the employee can revoke the waiver at any time by written notice. However, the employee can be excused from taking the meal breaks if the employer has a signed, non-revoked waiver on file.
In addition, when it would be an undue hardship for an employee to be relieved from all work duties for the 30 minute meal break, employers are permitted to always waive the required meal breaks. If employers want to use the exception, they must issue a BOLI waiver to all affected employees by March 16, 2009.
The break must be longer than 20 minutes and shorter than 30 minutes. The employee must be relieved of all work duties during the breaks. However, the law does not affect the requirement that an employee must have 10 minute uninterrupted rest breaks for each 4-hour work period.
In the U.S., there are nineteen states requiring meal breaks for virtually all employees. Oregon is one of these states. California and Illinois are also included.
According to the new regulations, employers cannot require an employee to waive breaks, or force employees to do so. Either the employer or the employee can revoke the waiver at any time by written notice. However, the employee can be excused from taking the meal breaks if the employer has a signed, non-revoked waiver on file.
In addition, when it would be an undue hardship for an employee to be relieved from all work duties for the 30 minute meal break, employers are permitted to always waive the required meal breaks. If employers want to use the exception, they must issue a BOLI waiver to all affected employees by March 16, 2009.
The break must be longer than 20 minutes and shorter than 30 minutes. The employee must be relieved of all work duties during the breaks. However, the law does not affect the requirement that an employee must have 10 minute uninterrupted rest breaks for each 4-hour work period.
In the U.S., there are nineteen states requiring meal breaks for virtually all employees. Oregon is one of these states. California and Illinois are also included.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
New Cafeteria Plan Rule
New federal regulations regarding cafeteria benefit plans are likely to be published within the next 30 to 60 days, according to the U.S. Department of Treasury. The new regulations show the information that the IRS (Internal Revenue Service) has issued formally or informally over the past 20 years.
The controversial non-discrimination clause in the regulations will not be finalized until President Barack Obama takes office. There is also one change in the cafeteria benefits plan that it will allow employers to add COBRA benefits to the options available, which is typically used by employees who become old enough for Medicare.
The new cafeteria plan regulates that an employee who changes jobs can even be reimbursed by the new plan for COBRA coverage under the old employer’s insurance policy. The COBRA premium is covered, because it is a valid healthcare expense, and the employee paid it during the appropriate year. The latest regulations may not go into effect until January 1, 2010.
The controversial non-discrimination clause in the regulations will not be finalized until President Barack Obama takes office. There is also one change in the cafeteria benefits plan that it will allow employers to add COBRA benefits to the options available, which is typically used by employees who become old enough for Medicare.
The new cafeteria plan regulates that an employee who changes jobs can even be reimbursed by the new plan for COBRA coverage under the old employer’s insurance policy. The COBRA premium is covered, because it is a valid healthcare expense, and the employee paid it during the appropriate year. The latest regulations may not go into effect until January 1, 2010.
Monday, February 16, 2009
President Obama Signed 3 Pro-Labor Executive Orders
On January 30, 2009, President Obama signed 3 Pro-Labor Executive Orders that affect the rights of employees of federal contractors. He said the orders should "level the playing field" for labor unions in their struggles with management.
The first order, entitled “Economy in Government Contracting”, will prevent federal contractors from being reimbursed for expenses meant to influence workers’ decisions about whether to form a union. The Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council is responsible for issuing and implementing regulations pursuant to this executive order within 150 days from January 30, 2009.
The second order, “Notification of Employee Rights Under Federal Law”, requires employers with federal contracts over $100,000 to inform their employees of their rights under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). This encourages collective bargaining, by posting a notice in the workplace. The order also reverses a Bush administration order, which required federal contractors to post a notice of an employee’s right to refuse to join a union (commonly referred to as the “Beck” Notice). The form and content of the notice of employee rights will be determined by the Secretary of Labor and will be the subject of a rule-making proceeding that will begin within 120 days from January 30, 2009.
The third order, “Non-Displacement of Qualified Workers Under Service Contracts”, requires federal contractors to offer jobs to current workers when contracts change. The order requires all new contracts under the Service Contract Act to contain a mandate that new contractors offer positions to the non-supervisory employees of the contractor that have lost the federal contract. The Secretary of Labor and the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council are responsible for issuing and implementing regulations pursuant to this executive order within 180 days from January 30, 2009.
Obama also used this occasion at the White House to announce formally a new White House task force on the problems of middle-class Americans to be chaired by Vice President Joe Bide.
The first order, entitled “Economy in Government Contracting”, will prevent federal contractors from being reimbursed for expenses meant to influence workers’ decisions about whether to form a union. The Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council is responsible for issuing and implementing regulations pursuant to this executive order within 150 days from January 30, 2009.
The second order, “Notification of Employee Rights Under Federal Law”, requires employers with federal contracts over $100,000 to inform their employees of their rights under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). This encourages collective bargaining, by posting a notice in the workplace. The order also reverses a Bush administration order, which required federal contractors to post a notice of an employee’s right to refuse to join a union (commonly referred to as the “Beck” Notice). The form and content of the notice of employee rights will be determined by the Secretary of Labor and will be the subject of a rule-making proceeding that will begin within 120 days from January 30, 2009.
The third order, “Non-Displacement of Qualified Workers Under Service Contracts”, requires federal contractors to offer jobs to current workers when contracts change. The order requires all new contracts under the Service Contract Act to contain a mandate that new contractors offer positions to the non-supervisory employees of the contractor that have lost the federal contract. The Secretary of Labor and the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council are responsible for issuing and implementing regulations pursuant to this executive order within 180 days from January 30, 2009.
Obama also used this occasion at the White House to announce formally a new White House task force on the problems of middle-class Americans to be chaired by Vice President Joe Bide.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Exempt Employees Salary Reduction Regulations
The topic of salary reductions for exempt employees has become one of the latest, hottest HR topics. Many employers are faced with this problem. The employers must take certain precautions before they reduce exempt employees’ salaries in order to avoid breaking the law.
There is no question that reducing hours for hourly employees is one option to reduce payroll. For example, reducing weekly hours from 40 hours per week to 36 hours per week can reduce his or her payroll expenses by ten percent; however, that solution won’t work for salaried exempt employees. According to the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), an exempt employee must be paid full weekly wage, no matter how many or how few hours the employee works per week. Whether the exempt employee works 20 or 30 hours per week, 60 hours per week, he or she will still be paid the full weekly salary.
In order to justify the exempt employee’s salary reduction, it should be:
l Permanent
l Applied to an entire group or class of employees
l Not directly tied to a reduction in hours
Reducing an exempt employee’s salary when business is slow can change the exempt status of everyone in that job. For this reason, the employer should permanently present the salary reduction to employees. The salary reduction needs to remain in effect for a minimum of three months.
Reducing hours for exempt employees when salary is reduced is a grey area. The safest course of action is for the employer not to reduce the number of hours when salary is reduced. However, according to Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) when a reduction both in salary and hours for an entire class of exempt employees is part of a change in business tactics, the employees retain their exempt status.
Sunday, February 08, 2009
Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 Release
President Obama signed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 on January 29, 2009. This act was Obama’s first bill signed into law. The bill had passed the Senate on Thursday, January 22 by a vote of 61 to 36.
President Obama stated before the signing, “Lilly Ledbetter did not set out to be a trailblazer or a household name. She was just a good hard worker who did her job — and she did it well — for nearly two decades before discovering that for years, she was paid less than her male colleagues for doing the very same work. Over the course of her career, she lost more than $200,000 in salary, and even more in pension and Social Security benefits — losses that she still feels today.”
“I intend to send a clear message: That making our economy work means making sure it works for everyone. That there are no second class citizens in our workplaces, and that it’s not just unfair and illegal — it’s bad for business — to pay someone less because of their gender, or their age, race, ethnicity, religion or disability,” the President said.
The bill was opposed by both SHRM and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, who claim it could have unintended consequence years from now, while supporters point out that the consequences only apply to employers who practice discrimination based on sex.
President Obama stated before the signing, “Lilly Ledbetter did not set out to be a trailblazer or a household name. She was just a good hard worker who did her job — and she did it well — for nearly two decades before discovering that for years, she was paid less than her male colleagues for doing the very same work. Over the course of her career, she lost more than $200,000 in salary, and even more in pension and Social Security benefits — losses that she still feels today.”
“I intend to send a clear message: That making our economy work means making sure it works for everyone. That there are no second class citizens in our workplaces, and that it’s not just unfair and illegal — it’s bad for business — to pay someone less because of their gender, or their age, race, ethnicity, religion or disability,” the President said.
The bill was opposed by both SHRM and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, who claim it could have unintended consequence years from now, while supporters point out that the consequences only apply to employers who practice discrimination based on sex.
Friday, February 06, 2009
New York WARN Act
Effective February 1, 2009, employers in New York must give their employees more notice prior to layoffs.
In August 2008, Gov. David Patterson signed into law the New York State Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (the "NY WARN Act"), which imposes similar requirements on employers to those required by the federal Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (the "Federal Act"), but there are some differences between the two.
According to the NY WARN ACT, the definition of "mass layoff" includes employment losses at a single site of employment that affect: (1) at least 25 full-time employees (compared with the 50 employee minimum of the Federal Act) as long as they represent at least 33 percent of the total active workforce; or (2) at least 250 full-time employees (compared with the 500 employee threshold of the Federal Act).
In addition, the Federal Act generally requires employers with 100 or more full-time employees to provide 60 days advance written notice regarding plant closures, plant relocation or mass layoffs to the affected employees' representative or, if none, to the affected employees themselves. The Federal Act also requires the employers to notify the state dislocated worker unit and the local government. However, based on the NY WARN Act, New York employers with 50 or more employees must provide such written notice 90 days in advance.
The NY WARN act is enforced by the state Commissioner of Labor, and any employer who violates the law may face civil penalties as well as back wage reimbursement.
In August 2008, Gov. David Patterson signed into law the New York State Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (the "NY WARN Act"), which imposes similar requirements on employers to those required by the federal Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (the "Federal Act"), but there are some differences between the two.
According to the NY WARN ACT, the definition of "mass layoff" includes employment losses at a single site of employment that affect: (1) at least 25 full-time employees (compared with the 50 employee minimum of the Federal Act) as long as they represent at least 33 percent of the total active workforce; or (2) at least 250 full-time employees (compared with the 500 employee threshold of the Federal Act).
In addition, the Federal Act generally requires employers with 100 or more full-time employees to provide 60 days advance written notice regarding plant closures, plant relocation or mass layoffs to the affected employees' representative or, if none, to the affected employees themselves. The Federal Act also requires the employers to notify the state dislocated worker unit and the local government. However, based on the NY WARN Act, New York employers with 50 or more employees must provide such written notice 90 days in advance.
The NY WARN act is enforced by the state Commissioner of Labor, and any employer who violates the law may face civil penalties as well as back wage reimbursement.
Monday, February 02, 2009
2009 Federal Labor & Employment Law Legislative and Regulatory Update
2009 Federal Labor & Employment Law Legislative and Regulatory have been updated. The following is the most important updates in relation with disabilities.
ADA Amended
Disabilities Act was signed by post-president Bush on September 25th, which has been taken into effect on January 1, 2009.
Expanded Definition of Disabilities
Besides the existing regulations, the amendment adds it could potentially include conditions such as high blood pressure, asthma, and other conditions not traditionally viewed as disabilities, such as “functions of the immune system, normal cell growth, digestive, bowel, bladder, neurological, brain, respiratory, circulatory, endocrine, and reproductive functions.” The new amendment is a substantial expansion for disabled workers under federal law.
Disregard of Mitigating Measures
U.S. Supreme Court decisions have held that mitigating measures, such as prosthetic devices, should be taken into account when determining whether the workers are disabled. Now the amendment has overruled that.
Substantially Limits” Liberalized.
U.S. Supreme Court set that a disability must” substantially limit” a major life activity. The new amendment about this regulation although has not been finally released, we can tell the change may be beneficial to people.
ADA Amended
Disabilities Act was signed by post-president Bush on September 25th, which has been taken into effect on January 1, 2009.
Expanded Definition of Disabilities
Besides the existing regulations, the amendment adds it could potentially include conditions such as high blood pressure, asthma, and other conditions not traditionally viewed as disabilities, such as “functions of the immune system, normal cell growth, digestive, bowel, bladder, neurological, brain, respiratory, circulatory, endocrine, and reproductive functions.” The new amendment is a substantial expansion for disabled workers under federal law.
Disregard of Mitigating Measures
U.S. Supreme Court decisions have held that mitigating measures, such as prosthetic devices, should be taken into account when determining whether the workers are disabled. Now the amendment has overruled that.
Substantially Limits” Liberalized.
U.S. Supreme Court set that a disability must” substantially limit” a major life activity. The new amendment about this regulation although has not been finally released, we can tell the change may be beneficial to people.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
New Jersey Minimum Wage Has Increased to $8.50 per Hour in 2009
In the report of the State of New Jersey Minimum Wage Advisory Commission, there is new policy about the minimum wage of New Jersey. In the report, the commission clearly states that the minimum wage of New Jersey has increased from $7.15 per hour to $8.50 per hour in 2009. The new policy had been taken effect on January 1, 2009.
The Commission also recommend that the minimum wage should be increased automatically from year to year based on the increase in the consumer price index. What’s more, the Commission also recommends that a minimum cash wage requirement for tipped workers should be set up.
It should be noted that the Commission had made recommendations in the Commission’s First Annual Report in 2007 for a minimum wage increase from $7.15 per hour to $8.25 per hour. However, its recommendations never were signed into law.
The Commission also recommend that the minimum wage should be increased automatically from year to year based on the increase in the consumer price index. What’s more, the Commission also recommends that a minimum cash wage requirement for tipped workers should be set up.
It should be noted that the Commission had made recommendations in the Commission’s First Annual Report in 2007 for a minimum wage increase from $7.15 per hour to $8.25 per hour. However, its recommendations never were signed into law.
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Colorado Minimum Wage Increased to $7.28
Colorado has increased its minimum wage to $7.28 per hour from January 1, 2009.
For tipped employees, the minimum wage increased from $4.00 per hour to $4.26 per hour - no more than $3.02 can be used to offset the minimum wage.
In accordance with the Colorado Constitution, the state minimum wage is to be adjusted annually for inflation, based on the Consumer Price Index used for Colorado, and Colorado is one of about a dozen U.S. states where the minimum wage is adjusted for inflation every year.
For tipped employees, the minimum wage increased from $4.00 per hour to $4.26 per hour - no more than $3.02 can be used to offset the minimum wage.
In accordance with the Colorado Constitution, the state minimum wage is to be adjusted annually for inflation, based on the Consumer Price Index used for Colorado, and Colorado is one of about a dozen U.S. states where the minimum wage is adjusted for inflation every year.
Friday, January 09, 2009
Washington Increased Its Minimum Wage to $8.55
Washington has increased its minimum wage to $8.55 on January 1, 2009, increasing 48 cents compared with last year. The new act not only apply to non-agricultural jobs but agricultural jobs
With the updating this time, the minimum wage of Washington is still the highest minimum wage among all the states in United States.
Initiative 688, approved by voters in 1998, requires the Labor and Industrial adjust the minimum wage each year according to the changes in the federal Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers. The Consumer Price Index cover the past 12 months ending on August 31. The mentioned index went by 5.9 percent during at the end of August 2008.
With the updating this time, the minimum wage of Washington is still the highest minimum wage among all the states in United States.
Initiative 688, approved by voters in 1998, requires the Labor and Industrial adjust the minimum wage each year according to the changes in the federal Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers. The Consumer Price Index cover the past 12 months ending on August 31. The mentioned index went by 5.9 percent during at the end of August 2008.
Thursday, January 08, 2009
Employers May Recover Wage Overpayments
Employers may occasionally overpay their employees based on an assumed amount of hours before the employees’ actual timesheets are submitted or processed.
Under such circumstances, may the employer recover the overpayment by taking a deduction from the next paycheck? In accordance with California law, the employers usually can’t make any deductions from their employees’ wages except for certain withholdings (such as taxes) or as authorized by the employees for medical or health benefits or pension plan contributions.
However, on November 25, 2008, the Department of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE) confirmed that employers may generally recover wage overpayments if they meet the following conditions:
(1) The deduction cannot cause the employee to earn less than the minimum wage. The deduction may not be taken if it would cause the employee to earn less than the minimum wage. The employer can only take an amount that would keep the employee earning at least minimum wage.
(2) The deduction must be expressly authorized by the employee in writing. According to Labor Code section 300, the DLSE has explained that only when the employee has specifically and voluntarily authorized the deduction in a written form before the deduction is taken, may the employer recover the overpayment. In addition, if the employee’s timesheet reflects fewer hours than he/she was actually paid, then only when the timesheet "expressly and voluntarily authorizes a specific prospective deduction," can it be qualified as a written authorization.
The deduction cannot be taken out of the employee’s final paycheck. The DLSE says that no deduction may be taken from the employee's final paycheck. In addition, under Labor Code section 203, if such a deduction is made, the employer can be liable for "waiting time" penalties of up to 30 days’ pay.
Under such circumstances, may the employer recover the overpayment by taking a deduction from the next paycheck? In accordance with California law, the employers usually can’t make any deductions from their employees’ wages except for certain withholdings (such as taxes) or as authorized by the employees for medical or health benefits or pension plan contributions.
However, on November 25, 2008, the Department of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE) confirmed that employers may generally recover wage overpayments if they meet the following conditions:
(1) The deduction cannot cause the employee to earn less than the minimum wage. The deduction may not be taken if it would cause the employee to earn less than the minimum wage. The employer can only take an amount that would keep the employee earning at least minimum wage.
(2) The deduction must be expressly authorized by the employee in writing. According to Labor Code section 300, the DLSE has explained that only when the employee has specifically and voluntarily authorized the deduction in a written form before the deduction is taken, may the employer recover the overpayment. In addition, if the employee’s timesheet reflects fewer hours than he/she was actually paid, then only when the timesheet "expressly and voluntarily authorizes a specific prospective deduction," can it be qualified as a written authorization.
The deduction cannot be taken out of the employee’s final paycheck. The DLSE says that no deduction may be taken from the employee's final paycheck. In addition, under Labor Code section 203, if such a deduction is made, the employer can be liable for "waiting time" penalties of up to 30 days’ pay.
Sunday, January 04, 2009
13 States' Labor Law Poster Update in 2009
The state of Arizona has increased its minimum wage from $6.90 per hour to $7.25 per hour effective January 1, 2009.
The state of Colorado has increased its minimum wage from $7.02 per hour to $7.28 per hour effective January 1, 2009.
The state of Connecticut has increased its minimum wage from current $7.65 per hour to $8.00 per hour effective January 1, 2009; and will increase the minimum wage again to $8.25 effective January 1, 2010.
The state of Florida has increased the minimum wage from current $6.79 per hour to $7.21 per hour effective January 1, 2009. After July 23, 2009, Florida will go by the Federal Minimum Wage of $7.25 to replace Florida's wage.
The state of Louisiana has updated their Earned Income Credit posting to include 2008 gross income reporting information effective January 1, 2009.
The state of Missouri has increased its minimum wage from $6.65 per hour to $7.05 per hour effective January 1, 2009.
The state of Montana has increased its minimum wage from $6.55 per hour to $6.90 per hour effective January 1, 2009, and will increase the rate again to $6.90 effective July 24, 2009.
The state of New Jersey has created a new, required Paid Family Leave Insurance poster (which will not replace the current NJ FMLA poster), effective January 1, 2009.
The state of New York has update its Licensure and Employment of Persons Prev. Convicted posting to reflect the requirement that employers must post a copy of Article 23-A of the correction law relating to the employment of persons with a criminal conviction in an accessible location at the workplace, effective February 1, 2009.
The state of Ohio has increased its minimum wage from $7.00 per hour to $7.30 per hour effective January 1, 2009.
The state of Oregon has increased its minimum wage rate from $7.95 per hour to $8.40 per hour effective January 1, 2009.
The state of Vermont has increased its minimum wage from $7.68 per hour to $8.06 per hour effective January 1, 2009.
The state of Washington has increased its minimum wage from $8.07 to $8.55 per hour effective January 1, 2009.
The state of Colorado has increased its minimum wage from $7.02 per hour to $7.28 per hour effective January 1, 2009.
The state of Connecticut has increased its minimum wage from current $7.65 per hour to $8.00 per hour effective January 1, 2009; and will increase the minimum wage again to $8.25 effective January 1, 2010.
The state of Florida has increased the minimum wage from current $6.79 per hour to $7.21 per hour effective January 1, 2009. After July 23, 2009, Florida will go by the Federal Minimum Wage of $7.25 to replace Florida's wage.
The state of Louisiana has updated their Earned Income Credit posting to include 2008 gross income reporting information effective January 1, 2009.
The state of Missouri has increased its minimum wage from $6.65 per hour to $7.05 per hour effective January 1, 2009.
The state of Montana has increased its minimum wage from $6.55 per hour to $6.90 per hour effective January 1, 2009, and will increase the rate again to $6.90 effective July 24, 2009.
The state of New Jersey has created a new, required Paid Family Leave Insurance poster (which will not replace the current NJ FMLA poster), effective January 1, 2009.
The state of New York has update its Licensure and Employment of Persons Prev. Convicted posting to reflect the requirement that employers must post a copy of Article 23-A of the correction law relating to the employment of persons with a criminal conviction in an accessible location at the workplace, effective February 1, 2009.
The state of Ohio has increased its minimum wage from $7.00 per hour to $7.30 per hour effective January 1, 2009.
The state of Oregon has increased its minimum wage rate from $7.95 per hour to $8.40 per hour effective January 1, 2009.
The state of Vermont has increased its minimum wage from $7.68 per hour to $8.06 per hour effective January 1, 2009.
The state of Washington has increased its minimum wage from $8.07 to $8.55 per hour effective January 1, 2009.
Saturday, January 03, 2009
Tips for Safe in Workplace Holiday Parties
In the workplace, employees and employers often get together to celebrate special events. If the drinks include alcohol, the potential for unfortunate consequences greatly increases. If alcohol is used improperly, it may expose employers to liability under tort, workers' compensation or other laws.
According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's (NHTSA), each year employers loset more than $9 billion as a result of accidents by employees who are under the influence of alcohol. Employers should check the Liquor liability laws in their state.
Many employers are cutting back on holiday parties this year as a cost-saving measure. The U.S. Department of Labor offers a series of tips for workplace celebrations to reduce the risk for employers. These guidelines include extending the workplace substance abuse policy under any work-related situations.
There is also good news for employers. They can protect their businesses by educating employees about the harmful effects of impaired driving. By doing so, employers do more than just safeguard their business assets—they contribute to the nationwide campaign to eliminate and reduce a preventable crime and play an important part in making their communities safer for their friends and families and those of their employees.
According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's (NHTSA), each year employers loset more than $9 billion as a result of accidents by employees who are under the influence of alcohol. Employers should check the Liquor liability laws in their state.
Many employers are cutting back on holiday parties this year as a cost-saving measure. The U.S. Department of Labor offers a series of tips for workplace celebrations to reduce the risk for employers. These guidelines include extending the workplace substance abuse policy under any work-related situations.
There is also good news for employers. They can protect their businesses by educating employees about the harmful effects of impaired driving. By doing so, employers do more than just safeguard their business assets—they contribute to the nationwide campaign to eliminate and reduce a preventable crime and play an important part in making their communities safer for their friends and families and those of their employees.
Monday, December 15, 2008
IRS Announces Mileage Rate For 2009
On Nov. 24, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) announced that as of Jan. 1, 2009, the standard mileage rates for business miles driven will be 55 cents per mile.
The business mileage rate was 50.5 cents in the first half of 2008, and 58.5 cents in the second half, which was an adjustment based on rising gas prices.
The standard mileage rate for business is based on an annual study of the fixed and variable costs of operating a vehicle. However, the rate cannot be used for any vehicle used for hire or for more than four vehicles used simultaneously.
Under Labor Code section 2802, California employers need to utilize the IRS mileage rate to reimburse employees for miles driven for business purposes. If faced with a claim for failure to reimburse expenses, the burden would be on the employer to prove that its mileage reimbursement rate adequately covered all of the employee's actual costs of operating a vehicle for employment purposes.
Employers should review their mileage reimbursement policies to stay in compliance with the law.
The business mileage rate was 50.5 cents in the first half of 2008, and 58.5 cents in the second half, which was an adjustment based on rising gas prices.
The standard mileage rate for business is based on an annual study of the fixed and variable costs of operating a vehicle. However, the rate cannot be used for any vehicle used for hire or for more than four vehicles used simultaneously.
Under Labor Code section 2802, California employers need to utilize the IRS mileage rate to reimburse employees for miles driven for business purposes. If faced with a claim for failure to reimburse expenses, the burden would be on the employer to prove that its mileage reimbursement rate adequately covered all of the employee's actual costs of operating a vehicle for employment purposes.
Employers should review their mileage reimbursement policies to stay in compliance with the law.
Thursday, December 11, 2008
2009 Federal Healthcare Regulations
According to a recent news release by the Society of Human Resource Management (SHRM), the U.S. Department of Labor has issued final rules under the Newborns’ and Mothers’ Health Protection Act of 1996. The new regulations, taking effect on December 19, 2008, apply to health insurance plans issued on or after January 1, 2009.
The rules were issued in conjunction with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the Treasury Department. They apply to group health plans and health insurers, including businesses that are self-insured. The new rules from the U.S. Department of Labor regulate, among other things, the length of time mothers and newborn babies may stay in the hospital.
Under the “general rule”, employers can restrict the hospital stay after a cesarean to 96 hours – but cannot require that mothers leave the hospital sooner. The new federal regulations do not require that new mothers stay in the hospital that long. The regulations contain a long list of restrictions to ensure that an early discharge does not endanger the health of mother or infant. In particular, the insurance company cannot provide financial incentives to healthcare providers to require mothers leave the hospital earlier.
The rules were issued in conjunction with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the Treasury Department. They apply to group health plans and health insurers, including businesses that are self-insured. The new rules from the U.S. Department of Labor regulate, among other things, the length of time mothers and newborn babies may stay in the hospital.
Under the “general rule”, employers can restrict the hospital stay after a cesarean to 96 hours – but cannot require that mothers leave the hospital sooner. The new federal regulations do not require that new mothers stay in the hospital that long. The regulations contain a long list of restrictions to ensure that an early discharge does not endanger the health of mother or infant. In particular, the insurance company cannot provide financial incentives to healthcare providers to require mothers leave the hospital earlier.
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Arizona Minimum Wage Will Increase to $7.25 per hour Jan. 1, 2009
According to the Industrial Commission of Arizona, the minimum wage in Arizona will increase to $7.25 per hour from $6.90 per hour. The new wage will take effect in January 1, 2009.
In order to cooperate with Arizona’s Minimum Wage Initiative, the Industrial Commission is supposed to adjust the state’s minimum wage every year. According to Arizona Revised Statutes Section 23-363(B), the minimum wage shall be increased on January 1, 2008 and 2009 as a result of the increasing of the cost of living.
The Consumer Price Index is a good mirror to reflect the cost of living, The increase in the cost of living shall be measured by the percentage increase as of August of the immediately preceding year over the level as of August of the previous year of the Consumer Price Index (All Urban Consumers, U.S. City, All Items) or its successor index as published by the Department of Labor or its successor agency, with the minimum wage increase rounded to the nearest five cents”.
Based on the increase of Department of labor’s Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers from 2007 to 2008, if the initiative requirement that all increase must be rounded to the nearest five cents, the new minimum wage if Arizona will be $7.25 per hour in 2009. It is expected that the minimum wage in 2009 of Arizona will continue to exceed the federal minimum wage through the first half of 2009.
In order to cooperate with Arizona’s Minimum Wage Initiative, the Industrial Commission is supposed to adjust the state’s minimum wage every year. According to Arizona Revised Statutes Section 23-363(B), the minimum wage shall be increased on January 1, 2008 and 2009 as a result of the increasing of the cost of living.
The Consumer Price Index is a good mirror to reflect the cost of living, The increase in the cost of living shall be measured by the percentage increase as of August of the immediately preceding year over the level as of August of the previous year of the Consumer Price Index (All Urban Consumers, U.S. City, All Items) or its successor index as published by the Department of Labor or its successor agency, with the minimum wage increase rounded to the nearest five cents”.
Based on the increase of Department of labor’s Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers from 2007 to 2008, if the initiative requirement that all increase must be rounded to the nearest five cents, the new minimum wage if Arizona will be $7.25 per hour in 2009. It is expected that the minimum wage in 2009 of Arizona will continue to exceed the federal minimum wage through the first half of 2009.
Sunday, December 07, 2008
Montana’s Minimum Wage to Increase to $6.90 in January 2009
Effective January 1, 2009, the Montana minimum wage will increase by 35 cents, from $6.55 to $6.90 per hour.
Montana law requires an adjustment to the state minimum wage to be calculated no later than September 30 of each year, based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for the previous 12 months. This amount is to be rounded to the nearest 5 cents.
The current 2008 minimum wage rate is $6.55 per hour and the CPI increased 5.4 percent from August 2007 to August 2008. So the minimum wage will increase by 35 cents, to $6.90.
“This gives those Montanans who are struggling to keep up with higher energy and food prices some much needed help, “says Labor Commissioner Keith Kelly.
According to the Montana Department of Labor & Industry, more than 70 percent of the state voters supported raising Montana's minimum wage when they voted in favor of Initiative 151 that appeared on the ballot in 2006. The state's minimum wage will be the greater of either the current state or federal minimum wage. So on July 24, 2009, when the federal minimum wage increase to $7.25 per hour, which will be higher than state minimum wage $6.90 at that time, the Montana state minimum wage will increase again to $7.25 per hour.
Montana law requires an adjustment to the state minimum wage to be calculated no later than September 30 of each year, based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for the previous 12 months. This amount is to be rounded to the nearest 5 cents.
The current 2008 minimum wage rate is $6.55 per hour and the CPI increased 5.4 percent from August 2007 to August 2008. So the minimum wage will increase by 35 cents, to $6.90.
“This gives those Montanans who are struggling to keep up with higher energy and food prices some much needed help, “says Labor Commissioner Keith Kelly.
According to the Montana Department of Labor & Industry, more than 70 percent of the state voters supported raising Montana's minimum wage when they voted in favor of Initiative 151 that appeared on the ballot in 2006. The state's minimum wage will be the greater of either the current state or federal minimum wage. So on July 24, 2009, when the federal minimum wage increase to $7.25 per hour, which will be higher than state minimum wage $6.90 at that time, the Montana state minimum wage will increase again to $7.25 per hour.
Wednesday, December 03, 2008
New Federal Poster Available Online
The Department of Labor recently published a new “Workplace Poster Requirements for Small Businesses and Other Employer” poster. All the workplaces covered by Title VII or Executive Order 11246 are required to display the poster. The new poster changed the previous one slightly not dramatically. The purpose of the revision is for better clarifying employee rights and providing more specific definitions.
As for the specific time to display the updated poster, the Department of Labor has not given any official response. The Department provides electronic copies of the required posters and some of the posters are available in languages other than English.
Now the new poster is available at www.dol.gov/osbp/sbrefa/poster/matrix.htm.
As for the specific time to display the updated poster, the Department of Labor has not given any official response. The Department provides electronic copies of the required posters and some of the posters are available in languages other than English.
Now the new poster is available at www.dol.gov/osbp/sbrefa/poster/matrix.htm.
Monday, November 24, 2008
The Employee Free Choice Act
In this election year, the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), also known as the Card Check bill, has been discussed in terms of its effect on worker secret ballots. The focus of this bill is to make it easier to remove obstacles to union organizing. EFCA is supported by many Democrats in Congress and President-Elect Obama. It is very likely the bill will become law early in 2009. In that case, the bill would become the most significant modification to federal labor law in the past forty years.
The first feature of the EFCA is that it seeks to eliminate an employer’s right to a secret ballot election before asking the employer to accept unionization of its workplace. Once the employers are presented with authorization cards signed by a majority of its employees, the act would require them to recognize a union.
The second important feature of the EFCA is that it allows either the employers or the employees to request mediation if they cannot reach an agreement on initial collective bargaining.
Last but not least, the EFCA would for the first time create substantial penalties for labor violations. These would apply during any period when unions are attempting to organize and during negotiations of a first contract.
The first feature of the EFCA is that it seeks to eliminate an employer’s right to a secret ballot election before asking the employer to accept unionization of its workplace. Once the employers are presented with authorization cards signed by a majority of its employees, the act would require them to recognize a union.
The second important feature of the EFCA is that it allows either the employers or the employees to request mediation if they cannot reach an agreement on initial collective bargaining.
Last but not least, the EFCA would for the first time create substantial penalties for labor violations. These would apply during any period when unions are attempting to organize and during negotiations of a first contract.
Thursday, November 20, 2008
FMLA Final Rules Issued
On November 17, 2008, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) issued the new final regulations for the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) to replace the original 15-year-old one. The new regulations will take effect on January 16, 2009, and will require every employer to display a new version of the FMLA poster.
With regard to military leave, the new FMLA rule include:
Military Caregiver Leave: The new rule expands FMLA protections for family members caring for a covered service member with a serious injury or illness incurred in the line of duty. These family members may take up to 26 workweeks of leave in a 12-month period.
Leave for Qualifying Exigencies for Families of National Guard and Reserves: Under the new rule, employees with a covered family member on active duty may also take up to 12 weeks of FMLA job-protected leave for a “qualifying exigency”, which include short-notice deployments, military events and related activities, childcare and school activities, financial and legal arrangements, counseling, rest and recuperation, post-deployment activities and additional activities where the employer and employee agree to the leave
Other changes include:
The Ragsdale Decision/Penalties: The new rule removes the so-called "categorical" penalty (requiring an employer to provide 12 additional weeks of FMLA-protected leave after the employee has already taken 30 weeks of leave) and holds employers liable if an employee suffers individual harm because the employer did not follow the FMLA rules.
Waiver of Rights: The new rules state that employees may settle their FMLA claims out of court with the employer, even without departmental approval. However, prospective waivers of FMLA rights are still illegal.
Serious Health Condition: The new rules also provide guidance on the definition of "serious health condition." They clarify that if an employee is taking leave that contains more than three calendar days of incapacity plus two visits to a health care provider, the two visits must occur within 30 days of the start of the incapacity and the first visit must take place within 7 days of the first day of incapacity. In addition, according to the new rules, employees with chronic serious health conditions must visit a healthcare provider at least twice per year.
Light Duty: In at least two court cases, judges have ruled that an employee can use up his or her 12-week FMLA leave while on a "light duty" assignment. But under the new rules, time spent in "light duty" work can’t be counted toward any portion of the 12 weeks of FMLA, and if an employee is voluntarily doing light duty work, he or she is not on FMLA leave.
Perfect Attendance Awards: Under the new rules, an employer can deny perfect attendance awards to employees who take FMLA leave. But if employees on other types of leave get the perfect attendance awards, the awards must also be paid to those on FMLA leave.
Employer Notice Obligations: All employer notice requirements have been clarified in a "one-stop" section in the new regulations in order to clear up some conflicting provisions and time periods.
Employee Notice: Under the previous regulations, employees were allowed to notify their employers of their need for FMLA leave up to two business days afterwards, while under the new rules, employees must follow the employers’ usual and customary call-in procedures, unless there are unusual circumstances.
Medical Certification Process (Content and Clarification): The new rules add a requirement to make clear the group of persons who may have contact with an employee’s healthcare provider on behalf of the employer to obtain medical certifications, and an employee's direct supervisor is forbidden to have such contact.
According to Victoria A. Lipnic, Assistant Secretary for the Employment Standards Administration, these changes have been carefully weighed. “This common sense, balanced rule is the product of a two year-long transparent process involving about 20,000 public comments and reflects the careful consideration of the views of FMLA stakeholders,” said Victoria Lipnic.
The new FMLA rules will help both employees and employers better understand their rights and responsibilities. At the same time, they will speed the implementation of a new law that expands FMLA coverage for military family members.
As an employer, you will be required to post a new federal Family and Medical Leave poster and modify your current FMLA policies to stay in compliance with the new regulations.
With regard to military leave, the new FMLA rule include:
Military Caregiver Leave: The new rule expands FMLA protections for family members caring for a covered service member with a serious injury or illness incurred in the line of duty. These family members may take up to 26 workweeks of leave in a 12-month period.
Leave for Qualifying Exigencies for Families of National Guard and Reserves: Under the new rule, employees with a covered family member on active duty may also take up to 12 weeks of FMLA job-protected leave for a “qualifying exigency”, which include short-notice deployments, military events and related activities, childcare and school activities, financial and legal arrangements, counseling, rest and recuperation, post-deployment activities and additional activities where the employer and employee agree to the leave
Other changes include:
The Ragsdale Decision/Penalties: The new rule removes the so-called "categorical" penalty (requiring an employer to provide 12 additional weeks of FMLA-protected leave after the employee has already taken 30 weeks of leave) and holds employers liable if an employee suffers individual harm because the employer did not follow the FMLA rules.
Waiver of Rights: The new rules state that employees may settle their FMLA claims out of court with the employer, even without departmental approval. However, prospective waivers of FMLA rights are still illegal.
Serious Health Condition: The new rules also provide guidance on the definition of "serious health condition." They clarify that if an employee is taking leave that contains more than three calendar days of incapacity plus two visits to a health care provider, the two visits must occur within 30 days of the start of the incapacity and the first visit must take place within 7 days of the first day of incapacity. In addition, according to the new rules, employees with chronic serious health conditions must visit a healthcare provider at least twice per year.
Light Duty: In at least two court cases, judges have ruled that an employee can use up his or her 12-week FMLA leave while on a "light duty" assignment. But under the new rules, time spent in "light duty" work can’t be counted toward any portion of the 12 weeks of FMLA, and if an employee is voluntarily doing light duty work, he or she is not on FMLA leave.
Perfect Attendance Awards: Under the new rules, an employer can deny perfect attendance awards to employees who take FMLA leave. But if employees on other types of leave get the perfect attendance awards, the awards must also be paid to those on FMLA leave.
Employer Notice Obligations: All employer notice requirements have been clarified in a "one-stop" section in the new regulations in order to clear up some conflicting provisions and time periods.
Employee Notice: Under the previous regulations, employees were allowed to notify their employers of their need for FMLA leave up to two business days afterwards, while under the new rules, employees must follow the employers’ usual and customary call-in procedures, unless there are unusual circumstances.
Medical Certification Process (Content and Clarification): The new rules add a requirement to make clear the group of persons who may have contact with an employee’s healthcare provider on behalf of the employer to obtain medical certifications, and an employee's direct supervisor is forbidden to have such contact.
According to Victoria A. Lipnic, Assistant Secretary for the Employment Standards Administration, these changes have been carefully weighed. “This common sense, balanced rule is the product of a two year-long transparent process involving about 20,000 public comments and reflects the careful consideration of the views of FMLA stakeholders,” said Victoria Lipnic.
The new FMLA rules will help both employees and employers better understand their rights and responsibilities. At the same time, they will speed the implementation of a new law that expands FMLA coverage for military family members.
As an employer, you will be required to post a new federal Family and Medical Leave poster and modify your current FMLA policies to stay in compliance with the new regulations.
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
Ohio minimum wage to increase to $7.30 in 2009
The minimum wage in Ohio will increase on January 1, 2009, from $7 per hour to $7.30 per hour for non-tipped employees and from $3.50 per hour to $3.65 per hour for tipped employees. The increase was announced by the Ohio Department of Commerce and will apply to employers who gross more than $267,000 per year.
The state minimum wage for employees in smaller companies (grossing less than $255,000 per year or less than $267,000 after January 1, 2009) and for 14- and 15-year-old is currently $6.55 per hour and will increase to $7.25 per hour on July 24, 2009.
Passed by voters in November 2006, the constitutional amendment states that minimum wage in Ohio 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 12-month period prior to September. From September 1, 2007 to August 31, 2008, the CPI rose 4.6 percent.
The state minimum wage for employees in smaller companies (grossing less than $255,000 per year or less than $267,000 after January 1, 2009) and for 14- and 15-year-old is currently $6.55 per hour and will increase to $7.25 per hour on July 24, 2009.
Passed by voters in November 2006, the constitutional amendment states that minimum wage in Ohio 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 12-month period prior to September. From September 1, 2007 to August 31, 2008, the CPI rose 4.6 percent.
Pregnancy Discrimination Compliance Materials
According to the EEOC, pregnancy discrimination complaints increased by 65% between 1992 and this year. Part of that increase, but not all of it, may be due to an increase in the number of women with infants who work. In some areas, pregnancy discrimination complaints increased 50% between 1995 and 2006.
Companies avoid becoming the target of pregnancy discrimination claims by properly training supervisors, having strong HR policies, and using an FMLA Administrator Kit. Under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), employees are entitled to up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave for a variety of serious health conditions, including pregnancy.
In addition, employers cannot discriminate against pregnant employees according to the Pregnancy Discrimination Act. The employer cannot set mandatory leave periods, and employees with pregnancy disability have to be treated the same as employees on other types of medical leave.
Companies avoid becoming the target of pregnancy discrimination claims by properly training supervisors, having strong HR policies, and using an FMLA Administrator Kit. Under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), employees are entitled to up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave for a variety of serious health conditions, including pregnancy.
In addition, employers cannot discriminate against pregnant employees according to the Pregnancy Discrimination Act. The employer cannot set mandatory leave periods, and employees with pregnancy disability have to be treated the same as employees on other types of medical leave.
Monday, November 17, 2008
Connecticut Minimum Wage to Increase to $8.00 on January 1, 2009
The state of Connecticut will increase its minimum wage to $8.00 effective January 1, 2009, and to $8.25 effective January 1, 2010.
On June 23, 2008, the Connecticut General Assembly voted to override Governor M. Jodi Rell's veto of legislation that will increase the state's minimum wage from $7.65 to $8.00 effective January 1, 2009, and to $8.25 effective January 1, 2010.
In addition, the General Assembly also voted to override the governor's veto of a companion bill (S.B. 55) which will increase the minimum wage tip credit for bartenders and wait staff. S.B. 55 will allow hotels and restaurants to pay service employees who regularly receive tips less than minimum wage, as long as tips make up the difference.
Governor Rell said: “It is not a minimum wage increase that will support our families—it is a thriving economy, accomplished through a business-friendly environment with successful employers and reasonably priced consumer goods and services.” Connecticut's current minimum wage of $7.65 per hour is higher than the federal minimum of $6.55 per hour. Governor Rell signed the last increase in the minimum wage two years ago.
On June 23, 2008, the Connecticut General Assembly voted to override Governor M. Jodi Rell's veto of legislation that will increase the state's minimum wage from $7.65 to $8.00 effective January 1, 2009, and to $8.25 effective January 1, 2010.
In addition, the General Assembly also voted to override the governor's veto of a companion bill (S.B. 55) which will increase the minimum wage tip credit for bartenders and wait staff. S.B. 55 will allow hotels and restaurants to pay service employees who regularly receive tips less than minimum wage, as long as tips make up the difference.
Governor Rell said: “It is not a minimum wage increase that will support our families—it is a thriving economy, accomplished through a business-friendly environment with successful employers and reasonably priced consumer goods and services.” Connecticut's current minimum wage of $7.65 per hour is higher than the federal minimum of $6.55 per hour. Governor Rell signed the last increase in the minimum wage two years ago.
Vermont Minimum Wage to Increase to $8.06 on January 1, 2009
The state of Vermont will increase its minimum wage to $8.06 per hour effective January 1, 2009. The service or tipped employee basic wage will also increase to $3.91 per hour. The state minimum wage is subject to cost-of-living adjustments each year based on the CPI.
Governor James H. Douglas announced recently that, according to Title 21 of the Vermont Statutes, the state of Vermont will increase the minimum wage to $8.06 per hour effective January 1, 2009.
The law requires an adjustment to the minimum wage be calculated each year based on the change in the federal Consumer Price Index, US city average, not seasonally adjusted, for the 12 months ending in August, and cannot increase more than five percent per year. The 5.4% increase in the CPI-U will result in an increase of at most five percent, or $0.38, for 2009.
Governor James H. Douglas announced recently that, according to Title 21 of the Vermont Statutes, the state of Vermont will increase the minimum wage to $8.06 per hour effective January 1, 2009.
The law requires an adjustment to the minimum wage be calculated each year based on the change in the federal Consumer Price Index, US city average, not seasonally adjusted, for the 12 months ending in August, and cannot increase more than five percent per year. The 5.4% increase in the CPI-U will result in an increase of at most five percent, or $0.38, for 2009.
Workplace Injuries Reduce in 2007
On October 23, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) issued a report indicating that private industry employers have succeeded in reducing workplace injuries in 2007.
According to the BLS, approximately 4 million work-related injuries and illness occurred in 2007, a rate of 4.2 nonfatal injuries for each 100 full-time employees. Compared with 4.1 million cases altogether and 4.4 cases per 100 employees in 2006, that is a reduction of 4.5%. This is the fifth consecutive year that the rate of workplace injuries and illnesses declined.
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health Edwin G. Foulke, Jr., said, “The injury and illness results demonstrate that OSHA’s balanced approach to workplace safety encompassing education, training, information sharing, inspection, regulation and aggressive enforcement is achieving significant reductions in workplace injury and illness throughout the country. This report shows that employees are now safer in the workplace than ever before. This success validates our efforts, and we are redoubling this commitment to make workplaces even safer.”
“The 21 percent decline in the workplace injury and illness rate over the past 6 years, and the 4.5 percent decline over the past year, show the effectiveness of the strategy of targeted enforcement coupled with prevention through compliance assistance to promote a culture of safety at the workplace,” said Secretary of Labor Elaine L. Chao.
Safety figures for 2008 will not be released until November 2009.
According to the BLS, approximately 4 million work-related injuries and illness occurred in 2007, a rate of 4.2 nonfatal injuries for each 100 full-time employees. Compared with 4.1 million cases altogether and 4.4 cases per 100 employees in 2006, that is a reduction of 4.5%. This is the fifth consecutive year that the rate of workplace injuries and illnesses declined.
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Occupational Safety and Health Edwin G. Foulke, Jr., said, “The injury and illness results demonstrate that OSHA’s balanced approach to workplace safety encompassing education, training, information sharing, inspection, regulation and aggressive enforcement is achieving significant reductions in workplace injury and illness throughout the country. This report shows that employees are now safer in the workplace than ever before. This success validates our efforts, and we are redoubling this commitment to make workplaces even safer.”
“The 21 percent decline in the workplace injury and illness rate over the past 6 years, and the 4.5 percent decline over the past year, show the effectiveness of the strategy of targeted enforcement coupled with prevention through compliance assistance to promote a culture of safety at the workplace,” said Secretary of Labor Elaine L. Chao.
Safety figures for 2008 will not be released until November 2009.
Sunday, November 16, 2008
Employment situation Summary
According to the report of the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor, Nonfarm payroll employment fell by 240.000.The unemployment rate rose to 6.5 in October from 6.1 of September. The number of jobless persons went up to 10.1million, increasing 603.00.
In the last 12 months, the number of unemployment persons has increased by 2.8 million.
Among the unemployment increasing rate, the adult men account for 6.3 percent, which was ranking number one. Secondary to adult men, adult women is 5.3 percent. The unemployment rate for whites increased 5.9 percent while Hispanics rose 8.8 percent.
In October, the number of long-term unemployment is 2.3 million, increased by 249.000. Among the total unemployment, the number of long-term unemployment is 22.3 percent.
In this month, the number of persons who worked part time for economic reasons rose to 6.7 million. The persons who would like to work full time but were not given the chance are included in this category.
In the last 12 months, the number of unemployment persons has increased by 2.8 million.
Among the unemployment increasing rate, the adult men account for 6.3 percent, which was ranking number one. Secondary to adult men, adult women is 5.3 percent. The unemployment rate for whites increased 5.9 percent while Hispanics rose 8.8 percent.
In October, the number of long-term unemployment is 2.3 million, increased by 249.000. Among the total unemployment, the number of long-term unemployment is 22.3 percent.
In this month, the number of persons who worked part time for economic reasons rose to 6.7 million. The persons who would like to work full time but were not given the chance are included in this category.
Thursday, November 13, 2008
Florida Minimum Wage to Increase to $7.21 in 2009
The state of Florida will increase its minimum wage from $6.79 per hour to $7.21 per hour effective January 1, 2009, according to a recent announcement from Florida's Agency for Workforce Innovation ("AWI").
On November 2, 2004, Florida voters approved a constitutional amendment which created the state’s minimum wage; it applies to all employees in the state who are covered by the federal minimum wage. Florida law requires the Agency for Workforce Innovation to calculate a new minimum wage each year based on the Consumer Price Index, and publish the new minimum wage on January 1.
Florida employers should note that federal law requires businesses to pay the higher of either the federal minimum wage or the Florida minimum wage. The Florida minimum wage will be higher than the federal minimum wage until July 24, 2009, when the federal standard will increase to $7.25.
On November 2, 2004, Florida voters approved a constitutional amendment which created the state’s minimum wage; it applies to all employees in the state who are covered by the federal minimum wage. Florida law requires the Agency for Workforce Innovation to calculate a new minimum wage each year based on the Consumer Price Index, and publish the new minimum wage on January 1.
Florida employers should note that federal law requires businesses to pay the higher of either the federal minimum wage or the Florida minimum wage. The Florida minimum wage will be higher than the federal minimum wage until July 24, 2009, when the federal standard will increase to $7.25.
Holiday Shutdowns and Exempt Employees
Many employers are considering giving workers additional unpaid time off during the holidays because of the current economic crisis. The day after Thanksgiving and/or the day after Christmas are in many cases now being included as holidays. Some employers are considering giving employers an entire week between Christmas and New Years.
There are two kinds of employees who are not required to be paid during these holiday closures. One kind is hourly employees, and the other is non-exempt salaried employees.
However, the regulations regarding paying salaried exempt employees are more complex. According to Angela Stone of the SHRM, “if an exempt employee works any portion of a workweek, he or she must be paid for days in which they are ready, willing and able to work.” Stone also indicates that a deduction cannot be made for time when no work is available.
In California, the regulations regarding holiday shutdowns require that employers give notice to employees at least 90 days in advance if they will be required to use vacation or personal time for such closures.
There are two kinds of employees who are not required to be paid during these holiday closures. One kind is hourly employees, and the other is non-exempt salaried employees.
However, the regulations regarding paying salaried exempt employees are more complex. According to Angela Stone of the SHRM, “if an exempt employee works any portion of a workweek, he or she must be paid for days in which they are ready, willing and able to work.” Stone also indicates that a deduction cannot be made for time when no work is available.
In California, the regulations regarding holiday shutdowns require that employers give notice to employees at least 90 days in advance if they will be required to use vacation or personal time for such closures.
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
DOLE Plan for Workers Who May Lost Job
The department of labor and Employment (DOLE) said they had made a contingency plan for helping the local and overseas Filipino workers who may lose jobs due to the global financial crisis.
According to Labor and Employment Secretary Marianito D. Roque, the plan made a set of interventions for workers who may be fired due to the current international economic crisis. However, it is not to say that the crisis has already caused a massive displacement of workers.
Once the displacement occurs, the DOLE would immediately implement its contingency plan for affected local workers and overseas Filipino workers (OFWs). The interventions consist mainly of helping affected OFWs find employment in other overseas destinations or set up livelihood or business enterprises for those who no longer want to work abroad, and the fund from the livelihood program shall be set aside for assistance to displaced OFWs, according to Sec. Roque..
The DOLE is trying their best to open new employment opportunities for OFWs in other courtiers to offset job losses in the labor markets that could be hit adversely by the financial crisis.
According to Labor and Employment Secretary Marianito D. Roque, the plan made a set of interventions for workers who may be fired due to the current international economic crisis. However, it is not to say that the crisis has already caused a massive displacement of workers.
Once the displacement occurs, the DOLE would immediately implement its contingency plan for affected local workers and overseas Filipino workers (OFWs). The interventions consist mainly of helping affected OFWs find employment in other overseas destinations or set up livelihood or business enterprises for those who no longer want to work abroad, and the fund from the livelihood program shall be set aside for assistance to displaced OFWs, according to Sec. Roque..
The DOLE is trying their best to open new employment opportunities for OFWs in other courtiers to offset job losses in the labor markets that could be hit adversely by the financial crisis.
Registered Apprenticeship Programs Revised
The National Apprenticeship System provides millions of American workers with rigorous, industry-driven job training and high-wage employment in the nation’s most competitive industries.
On October 29, 2008, the Labor Department announced that it has revised regulations to update labor standards for the nation's Registered Apprenticeship programs.
In order to keep pace with changes related to 21st century employment opportunities, the revised regulations take the workforce demands of new and emerging industries into consideration, and create more flexibility for apprentices and employers, providing them with increased choices to meet the needs of industries which have traditionally used Registered Apprenticeship programs.
The most significant change to the regulations is the creation of multiple training approaches that increase flexibility for employers to select which path best serves an apprentice’s or employer’s needs.
“These regulations have been revised for the first time since 1977 to advance Registered Apprenticeship’s strengths in developing a skilled, competitive workforce for the 21st century global economy,” said Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for Employment and Training Brent R. Orrell. “The changes we are instituting through these new rules will create more options for employers, and position Registered Apprenticeship to engage today’s growing industries, while ensuring the safety of apprentices and the quality of programs.”
On October 29, 2008, the Labor Department announced that it has revised regulations to update labor standards for the nation's Registered Apprenticeship programs.
In order to keep pace with changes related to 21st century employment opportunities, the revised regulations take the workforce demands of new and emerging industries into consideration, and create more flexibility for apprentices and employers, providing them with increased choices to meet the needs of industries which have traditionally used Registered Apprenticeship programs.
The most significant change to the regulations is the creation of multiple training approaches that increase flexibility for employers to select which path best serves an apprentice’s or employer’s needs.
“These regulations have been revised for the first time since 1977 to advance Registered Apprenticeship’s strengths in developing a skilled, competitive workforce for the 21st century global economy,” said Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor for Employment and Training Brent R. Orrell. “The changes we are instituting through these new rules will create more options for employers, and position Registered Apprenticeship to engage today’s growing industries, while ensuring the safety of apprentices and the quality of programs.”
Sunday, November 09, 2008
New Mental Health Parity Bill
President George W. Bush recently signed the $700 billion Wall Street bailout. This bill also included an important provision concerning employee health benefits.
In this law, insurance carriers are required to provide equal coverage for mental and physical illnesses. Workers will receive benefits for treatment of depression, phobias, grief, drug dependence and other mental health issues. Treatment for mental illness was often previously limited to $2,000 per year, while some group health insurance plans covered physical illness up to $200,000 per year. This law makes that disparity illegal.
The law ensures that American workers continue to receive insurance coverage for mental health treatments under their group health insurance. A similar law in effect for the previous 12 years was scheduled to expire on January 1, 2010.
The bill passed the House on October 3 with a vote of 263 to 171. This measure is expected to cover up to one third of all workers in the U.S.
The law will be effective on January 1, 2010. The previous law would have expired before that day. Businesses with 50 or fewer employees are exempt.
In this law, insurance carriers are required to provide equal coverage for mental and physical illnesses. Workers will receive benefits for treatment of depression, phobias, grief, drug dependence and other mental health issues. Treatment for mental illness was often previously limited to $2,000 per year, while some group health insurance plans covered physical illness up to $200,000 per year. This law makes that disparity illegal.
The law ensures that American workers continue to receive insurance coverage for mental health treatments under their group health insurance. A similar law in effect for the previous 12 years was scheduled to expire on January 1, 2010.
The bill passed the House on October 3 with a vote of 263 to 171. This measure is expected to cover up to one third of all workers in the U.S.
The law will be effective on January 1, 2010. The previous law would have expired before that day. Businesses with 50 or fewer employees are exempt.
Thursday, November 06, 2008
No Texting While Driving in California
On September 24, 2008, California Governor Schwarzenegger signed bill S.B. 28 into law, banning drivers from reading, writing or sending a text message while driving in a vehicle beginning January 1, 2009.
The bill would impose a base fine of $20 for a first offense and $50 for any subsequent violation, but no violation point will be assigned to the driver’s license.
As he signed the bill, Schwarzenegger said, “Banning electronic text messaging while driving will keep drivers’ hands on the wheel and their eyes on the road, making our roadways a safer place for all Californians…Building on legislation already helping save lives in California, I am happy to sign this bill because it further encourages safe and responsible driving.”
Since July, drivers in California have been prohibited from using handheld wireless telephones while driving, unless the devices are configured to allow hands-free listening and talking, and drivers under age 18 are not allowed to use any electronic devices.
The bill would impose a base fine of $20 for a first offense and $50 for any subsequent violation, but no violation point will be assigned to the driver’s license.
As he signed the bill, Schwarzenegger said, “Banning electronic text messaging while driving will keep drivers’ hands on the wheel and their eyes on the road, making our roadways a safer place for all Californians…Building on legislation already helping save lives in California, I am happy to sign this bill because it further encourages safe and responsible driving.”
Since July, drivers in California have been prohibited from using handheld wireless telephones while driving, unless the devices are configured to allow hands-free listening and talking, and drivers under age 18 are not allowed to use any electronic devices.
Tuesday, November 04, 2008
San Francisco’s Minimum Wage To Increase To $9.79 Per Hour
The San Francisco Office of Labor Standards Enforcement announced on 17th, Oct that the City’s minimum wage would increase by 43 cents, from $9.36 per hour to $9.79 per hour effective January 1, 2009.
The Minimum Wage Ordinance, passed by San Francisco voters in November 2003, calls for annual rate adjustments based on the previous year’s Consumer Price Index for urban wage earners in the San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose metropolitan area.
According to San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom's office, the city will update multilingual posters to announce the new rates and mail the posters to 90,000 registered businesses and employers are required to post the notice in their workplace
The current national minimum wage is $6.55 per hour, while the California State minimum wage is currently $8.00 per hour.
The Minimum Wage Ordinance, passed by San Francisco voters in November 2003, calls for annual rate adjustments based on the previous year’s Consumer Price Index for urban wage earners in the San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose metropolitan area.
According to San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom's office, the city will update multilingual posters to announce the new rates and mail the posters to 90,000 registered businesses and employers are required to post the notice in their workplace
The current national minimum wage is $6.55 per hour, while the California State minimum wage is currently $8.00 per hour.
New York Nursing Mothers Act
The New York Nursing Mothers in the Workplace Act was passed in 2007. The act requires employers to provide reasonable unpaid break time for a working mother to express milk and permit mothers to use paid break time to express milk. The employer must provide mothers with a private area near the workplace. According to the law, bathrooms and storage areas are not suitable for mothers.
Mothers are covered under the law during the first three years of their infant’s life. “We recognize the tremendous health benefits that breastfed infants enjoy and how important it is to increase the number of infants that are breastfed. Breastfed infants are at reduced risk for asthma, obesity, diabetes and other chronic illnesses throughout their lifetimes. The evidence is clear that being breastfed is important to the lifelong health of infants, and we want to encourage new mothers to continue to breastfeed after they return to work,” said State Health Commissioner Richard F. Daines, M.D.
“Under the labor law, all nursing mothers in New York state have the right to express breast milk in the workplace, and it is the responsibility of every employer to make sure that their employees know their rights under the law,” said state Labor Commissioner M. Patricia Smith.
Illinois, Colorado and several other states have also passed laws to protect the rights of working mothers who are breastfeeding.
Mothers are covered under the law during the first three years of their infant’s life. “We recognize the tremendous health benefits that breastfed infants enjoy and how important it is to increase the number of infants that are breastfed. Breastfed infants are at reduced risk for asthma, obesity, diabetes and other chronic illnesses throughout their lifetimes. The evidence is clear that being breastfed is important to the lifelong health of infants, and we want to encourage new mothers to continue to breastfeed after they return to work,” said State Health Commissioner Richard F. Daines, M.D.
“Under the labor law, all nursing mothers in New York state have the right to express breast milk in the workplace, and it is the responsibility of every employer to make sure that their employees know their rights under the law,” said state Labor Commissioner M. Patricia Smith.
Illinois, Colorado and several other states have also passed laws to protect the rights of working mothers who are breastfeeding.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)