US

Subscribe to US via RSS

On May 6, 2020, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-62-20, creating a rebuttable presumption that an employee’s COVID-19-related illness arises out of employment for purposes of obtaining workers’ compensation benefits. This is not the first order of its kind; other states including Alaska, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Utah, and Wisconsin, have imposed similar rebuttable presumptions. However, most of these jurisdictions have limited the rebuttable presumption to first responders. California’s order doesn’t.

At the federal level, House Democrats are looking to follow suit, proposing a similar presumption for certain federal workers under the Health and Economic Recovery Omnibus Emergency Solutions Act (the “HEROES Act”). If enacted as proposed, the HEROES Act would create a presumption that certain federal employees who contract COVID-19 did so in the course and scope of their employment if the employees have a risk of exposure to COVID-19 at work and on-the-job contact with patients, members of the public, or co-workers. A similar presumption would apply to certain maritime workers.  The House passed the HEROES Act by a vote of 208-199 on May 15, 2020, but tremendous opposition is expected when the bill reaches the Republican dominated Senate.

Is California’s order likely to stick?

It’s difficult to tell. California business owners are unhappy with the likely significant increase in workers’ compensation liabilities and the inequity of shifting the cost of employees’ COVID-19 illnesses to employers. Challenges to the California order would not be surprising.Continue Reading Are You Sure You Contracted COVID-19 at Work? California Thinks So

With many thanks to Chris Guldberg for this post. 

On May 12, 2020, the IRS released Notice 2020-29 (the “Notice”) providing greater flexibility to make mid-year election changes under Code Section 125 cafeteria plans during 2020 with respect to employer-provided health coverage and health and dependent care flexible spending accounts (“FSAs”). The notice also provides additional time in which unused amounts in FSAs can be used to pay expenses and avoid forfeiture.

Mid-year Election Changes

As background, cafeteria plans are the vehicle that allow employees to elect to pay their share of benefit premium costs for certain welfare benefits (for example, the employee premium portion paid for medical coverage) on a pre-tax basis rather than paying for those costs on an after-tax basis. In general, employee cafeteria plan elections must be made prior to the first day of the plan year and cannot be changed during the plan year except for specific change in status type events permitted under the relevant regulations (for example, the birth of a child).Continue Reading Increased Flexibility for Taxpayers in Section 125 Cafeteria Plans in Response to COVID-19

With many thanks to Chris Guldberg for this post. 

Employers considering COVID-19-related layoffs and RIFs right now should add one more item to their checklist of considerations: the possibility of inadvertently triggering a “partial termination” of their tax-qualified retirement plan.

Where plan participant numbers decrease substantially, the plan may incur what’s known as a “partial termination.” This is significant because, once triggered, the IRS requires the benefits of all “affected employees” be fully vested. Failure to provide such vesting could put the plan’s tax-qualified status at risk.Continue Reading Beware — COVID-19 Layoffs May Trigger Liability for Partial Plan Terminations

We hope you found last week’s video chat series helpful and informative. Due to popular demand, we are continuing this series of quick and bite-sized video chats, where our employment partners team up with practitioners in various areas of law to discuss the most pressing issues for employers navigating the return to work.

This series

…

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.

As companies develop their reopening playbook, health & safety is of course the top line concern. Face coverings have emerged as one of the most popular preventative measures for mitigating the spread of the virus. For employers, questions abound about obligations related to face coverings.

We’ve been helping multinational companies navigate the use of face coverings in the workplace. Here are answers to some of the most common questions in the US:

  • Does the CDC require the use of face coverings in the workplace?

No. At this point, there is no federal requirement that employees wear face coverings in the workplace. The CDC recommends wearing cloth face coverings in public settings where other social distancing measures are difficult to maintain (e.g., grocery stores and pharmacies) especially in areas of significant community-based transmission. See here.

The CDC also recommends using cloth face coverings, and not surgical masks or N-95 respirators, which are critical supplies that must continue to be reserved for healthcare workers and other medical first responders.

  • Does OSHA require the use of face coverings in the workplace?

No, except in specific workplaces where there is a higher risk of airborne exposures. OSHA has not required employees to wear masks at work as a result of COVID-19, except in certain settings such as hospitals and other workplaces where Personal Protective Equipment was required before the pandemic.Continue Reading Face Coverings: Q&A for US Employers

Welcome to Baker McKenzie’s Labor and Employment video chat series! In these quick and bite-sized video chats, our employment partners team up with practitioners in various areas of law to discuss the most pressing issues for employers navigating the return to work.

This series builds on our recent client alert and webinar on reopening for…

This webinar recording covers government orders, creating a timeline, workplace safety and prevention strategies, testing and health screening, labor agreements, workforce communication, managing employee concerns, and litigation mitigation.

Please see below the webinar materials as well as additional resources.

…

The COVID-19 pandemic raises challenging issues for employers, particularly those that have multiple locations, provide a variety of services, and employ a global workforce that may travel routinely for business.

With increasing quarantine and other lock-down requirements appearing across the globe, what should employers be doing now to support the health and safety of their workforces?

An employer’s first priority is to protect the health and safety of its workforce. Recognize that this is unlikely to be a one-time occurrence. Being prepared now will allow employers to iterate in the future.

(1) Understand employer obligations in each affected jurisdiction (which will change).

  • Review applicable government health alerts and requirements for reporting.
  • Review local laws on employee privacy, association, potential for discrimination and leave/benefit/wage & hour entitlements. Remember that the balance between privacy and public health is achieved differently in different countries, but as viruses spread, those restrictions are often relaxed. For instance, primarily due to data privacy laws, employers in most of the EU generally may not notify health authorities that an employee has been infected.
  • Coordinate internally to develop employee communications and plans. Frequent communications with employees and their families is critical. Keeping in contact with official or governmental bodies such as the US State Department or the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) is essential to ensure the latest updates are available and to ensure employees are aware of any national contingency plans.

Continue Reading Pandemic Pause — Are you taking the right actions to protect your workplace?