In these recordings of our two-part webinar series, our presenters take a look back at 2020 and forecast what is likely to have the
We are exited to invite you to our two-part Annual Illinois Employer Update on February 2, 2021 from 1:00 – 2:15 pm CST and February 4, 2021 from 3:00 – 4:15 pm CST.
In two 75-minute virtual sessions, we will forecast what is likely to have the most significant impact on Illinois employers in 2021,…
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.
We are pleased to share a recent Law 360 article, “Ill. Venue Ruling Shows Value of Analyzing Remote Work,” with quotes from William Dugan. This article discusses the Illinois Supreme Court’s ruling in Tabirta v. Cummings, where the state high court ruled a defendant food manufacturer would have had to target an employee’s home…
On May 20, 2020, Chicago passed the “COVID-19 Anti-Retaliation Ordinance,” making it illegal for employers with employees in the City of Chicago to retaliate against employees who stay home: to follow public health orders related to COVID-19, to quarantine because of COVID-19 symptoms, or to care for an individual ill with COVID-19. Enacted as an amendment to Chicago’s Minimum Wage and Paid Sick Leave Ordinance, the Anti-Retaliation Ordinance prohibits employers from terminating, demoting, or taking other adverse action against employees who are unable to work for reasons related to COVID-19.
What do I need to know?
Under the Ordinance, an employer cannot terminate, demote, or take any other adverse action against an employee for obeying an order issued by Mayor Lightfoot, Governor Pritzker, or the Chicago Department of Public Health (or, in the case of subsections (2) through (4) below, a treating healthcare provider) requiring the employee to:
- Stay at home to minimize the transmission of COVID-19;
- Remain at home while experiencing COVID-19 symptoms or while being sick with COVID-19;
- Obey a quarantine order issued to the employee (to keep an employee who has come into contact with an infected person separate from others);
- Obey an isolation order issued to the employee (to separate an employee with COVID-19 from others); or
- Obey an order issued by the Commissioner of Health regarding the duties of hospitals and other congregate facilities.
In addition, an employer cannot take adverse action against an employee for caring for an individual subject to subsections (1) through (3) above.
The Ordinance became effective on May 20, 2020, and will expire (unless City Council intervenes) when the Commissioner of Public Health makes a written determination “that the threat to public health posed by COVID-19 has diminished to the point that [the] ordinance can safely be repealed.”
Recently, Southwest Airlines won a second major victory when Northern District of Illinois Judge Seeger granted its motion to dismiss claims brought under Illinois’ unique Biometric Information Privacy Act (“BIPA”). Crooms v. Southwest Airlines Co., Case No. 19-cv-2149.
Plaintiffs alleged Southwest violated BIPA by requiring them to scan their fingers when clocking in and out of work without giving them the written notice or receiving their consent as required by BIPA. When initially employed, three of the plaintiffs were represented by the Transportation Workers Union of America, AFL-CIO Local 555 (“TWU”) and were covered by a collective bargaining agreement (“CBA”). The CBAs at issue provided Southwest had the “right to manage and direct the work force” and included a mandatory four-step grievance and arbitration procedure for resolution of disputes. Plaintiffs were later promoted to Ramp Supervisors, a non-union position and agreed to comply with Southwest’s Alternative Dispute Resolution (“ADR”) Program. The fourth named plaintiff was never covered by a CBA but was always a party to the ADR Program.
We are pleased to share our Shelter-in-Place / Reopening Tracker.
This document identifies the relevant state-wide shelter-in-place orders and their related expiration dates as well as the state-wide reopening plans, and whether local (county/municipal) orders also apply, in each of the 50 United States.
Please check back for updates throughout the pandemic.
On May 1 certain ILLINOIS employers got the green light to begin reopening, after the entry of a modified statewide stay-at-home order. Employers must require employees to maintain social distancing or must wear masks provided by the Company. We take you through the details below:
What does the order say about face covering, social distancing, and hygiene for business employers?
The order’s requirements for business employers depends on the type of business.
Are there rules for non-essential stores?
On Monday, we reported the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Commission’s (IWCC) Emergency Rule that expanded eligibility requirements for workers’ compensation benefits. On April 16, 2020, however, the IWCC, approved changes to the Emergency Rule effective immediately. The Amendments:
- Confirm the Emergency Rule will last 150 days and will not expire prior to this period.
On Monday, April 13, 2020, with less than 24 hours’ notice, the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Commission issued an emergency ruling (the “Rule”) expanding eligibility requirements for workers’ compensation benefits. Under the Rule, which will last a maximum of 150 days, certain categories of workers who claim to have been exposed to or who have contracted COVID-19 because of their job are automatically presumed to be telling the truth so they can receive workers’ compensation benefits. Prior to the ruling, Illinois employees injured on the job needed to prove their injury or illness was directly caused by their work.
The Rule only applies to proceedings before the Commission brought by workers specifically identified by the Rule: