As predicted here, on February 19, the DOL formally withdrew gig-worker guidance from the Trump administration. The DOL’s Wage and Hour Administration ditched a pair of interpretative letters from 2019, including one that platform-based companies could have used as a legal defense against claims that their drivers are employees subject to the Fair Labor
This webinar recording takes a look back at 2020 and prepares employers for what’s on the horizon in 2021. Our presenters review COVID-19 and its continued impact on the workforce, diversity and inclusion considerations, what to expect under the Biden Administration, and a update on recent New York laws.
Please click here to view this…
The DOL’s just-issued final rule on employee vs. independent contractor classifications under the FLSA seems likely to be reversed. On January 20, the White House issued a memorandum to the heads of all executive departments and agencies ordering them to halt all non-emergency rulemaking and regulatory activity issued under the previous administration pending review by…
President Biden did not waste any time after taking office on January 20, 2021. Shortly after the Presidential Oath of Office was administered, Biden signed 17 executive actions, which either impact the workplace or provide insight into what may be forthcoming under the new administration for employers.
A Flurry of Executive Orders on Day One
Biden issued a memorandum to agencies to freeze all last-minute regulations put in motion by the prior administration as President Trump was leaving office. Notably, these regulatory “freeze memos” are not uncommon for incoming administrations to issue. This pause on the prior administration’s last-minute regulations will give the Biden administration the opportunity to evaluate the so-called “midnight regulations” and determine if they will become final, be amended, or rescinded altogether.
He also issued an Executive Order reinforcing that Title VII prohibits the federal government from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. The Order references the recent Supreme Court case of Bostock v. Clayton County (blogged about here). Specifically, the Order states “[i]t is the policy of my Administration to prevent and combat discrimination on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation, and to fully enforce Title VII and other laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation.” The Order notes that laws that prohibit sex discrimination (specifically referencing Title IX, the Fair Housing Act, and section 412 of the Immigration and Nationality Act) also prohibit discrimination on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation.
Businesses engaging independent contractors have new guidance from the Department of Labor (DOL) for determining whether an individual is an employee or independent contractor, but the guidance may never take effect. On January 6, 2021, the DOL issued a final rule for determining whether an individual is an employee or independent contractor. The rule focuses on whether workers are economically dependent on another business–making them more likely to be an employee of that business, and entitled to the minimum wage and overtime under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)–or are economically dependent upon themselves, making them true independent contractors.
Continue Reading DOL Announces Final Rule for FLSA Worker Classification Focused on Economic Dependence-But Its Future is Uncertain
While most employers transitioned large segments of their workforces to remote work over the course of the past year, many also questioned how to satisfy various posting requirements when their workforce is at home. Fortunately, in late December, the Department of Labor (DOL) issued guidance on how employers can use virtual means to distribute and maintain the various posters required by federal employment laws.
By way of reminder, several federal laws, including the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), the Employee Polygraph Protection Act (EPPA), and the Service Contract Act (SCA) require employers to post a notice of rights in a conspicuous location. Typically — and pre-pandemic — employers met the notice requirements by placing posters on bulletin boards in well-trafficked locations such as break rooms or lobbies. But with the increase in remote work, many employers used company email and intranets as a workaround to notify employees of their rights. Now, employers have guidance to ensure their practices are compliant.
We are excited to invite you to our New York Employer Update on January 21, 2021 from 12:00 – 1:00 pm ET.
2020 posed unprecedented challenges for New York employers. We know that in addition to keeping your employees safe and maintaining business continuity, it has been difficult to keep track of the rapidly changing…
Now that COVID-19 vaccinations are being administered in the US, employers have to figure out what to do in terms of vaccinating the workforce.
To learn more click here to access the video.
It’s hard to miss the uptick in litigation against high profile US companies over alleged unequal pay for female employees these days. Cases seem to hit the headlines frequently and several targeted industries include professional sports, professional services organizations, and technology companies. With equal pay protections constantly expanding, and employees often seeking class certification, in 2021, employers should be especially diligent in identifying and rectifying unjustified pay disparities.
So, if you need a New Year’s Resolution, consider undertaking a pay equity audit. This will position your company to determine, at baseline, whether any unjustified pay disparities exist, where those disparities lie and proactively take any remedial measures to help mitigate against becoming a headline. In conducting a pay equity audit, employers should pay close attention to the legal backdrop of pay equity, and how that landscape is changing.
As we head into the New Year, here are several US developments companies ought to know:
California Enacts First Employee Data Reporting Law
On September 30, California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed Senate Bill 973, Sen. Hannah-Beth Jackson’s bill relating to annual reporting of employee pay data. SB 973 requires private employers with 100 or more employees to report employee pay data to the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) by March 31, 2021, and annually thereafter, for specified job categories by gender, race and ethnicity. California will be the first state to require employers to submit such employee data.
On December 16, 2020, the EEOC posted a new section on vaccinations in its COVID-19-related technical assistance Q&As, only five days after the FDA granted its first Emergency Use Authorization for a COVID-19 vaccine. Section K of the EEOC’s COVID-19 Q&As (“Vaccinations”) updates and expands the EEOC’s publication “What You Should Know About COVID-19 and the ADA, the Rehabilitation Act, and Other EEO Laws,” providing information to employers and employees regarding the impact legal requirements under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) may have on whether and how COVID-19 vaccines can be utilized in the workplace.
The Q&As are linked here, and copied below for ease of reference.
The availability of COVID-19 vaccinations may raise questions about the applicablilty of various equal employment opportunity (EEO) laws, including the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act, GINA, and Title VII, including the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (see Section J, EEO rights relating to pregnancy). The EEO laws do not interfere with or prevent employers from following CDC or other federal, state, and local public health authorities’ guidelines and suggestions.
1.1 ADA and Vaccinations
K.1. For any COVID-19 vaccine that has been approved or authorized by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), is the administration of a COVID-19 vaccine to an employee by an employer (or by a third party with whom the employer contracts to administer a vaccine) a “medical examination” for purposes of the ADA? (12/16/20)
No. The vaccination itself is not a medical examination. As the Commission explained in guidance on disability-related inquiries and medical examinations, a medical examination is “a procedure or test usually given by a health care professional or in a medical setting that seeks information about an individual’s physical or mental impairments or health.” Examples include “vision tests; blood, urine, and breath analyses; blood pressure screening and cholesterol testing; and diagnostic procedures, such as x-rays, CAT scans, and MRIs.” If a vaccine is administered to an employee by an employer for protection against contracting COVID-19, the employer is not seeking information about an individual’s impairments or current health status and, therefore, it is not a medical examination.
Although the administration of a vaccination is not a medical examination, pre-screening vaccination questions may implicate the ADA’s provision on disability-related inquiries, which are inquiries likely to elicit information about a disability. If the employer administers the vaccine, it must show that such pre-screening questions it asks employees are “job-related and consistent with business necessity.” See Question K.2.