California

Subscribe to California via RSS

Mark Twain never actually said “The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated.”  But had he sat in on yesterday’s (June 3, 2021) Cal/OSHA Standards Board meeting, he might have said something similar about the proposed amendments to Cal/OSHA’s COVID-19 Emergency Temporary Standards (“ETS”).

And no one would blame him because, less than an hour after voting to reject the proposed amendments to the ETS, Cal/OSHA’s Standards Board completely changed course by voting unanimously to approve the amendments. The amended ETS, which will apply to most California employers and workplaces, is expected to take effect June 15.

What does this mean for California employers?

In summary, the amendments will require employees who work indoors to continue wearing face coverings indefinitely, except in certain limited circumstances, but also will allow employers to relax physical distancing requirements after confirming which employees are fully vaccinated and providing unvaccinated employees with respirators for their voluntary use.Continue Reading Cal/OSHA Board Votes to Approve Amendments to COVID-19 ETS Almost Immediately After Voting To Reject Them

Apparently Cal/OSHA is not yet ready for California workplaces to do away with masks and social distancing, despite the recent Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) and California state guidance allowing fully vaccinated persons to forgo masks and distancing indoors. On May 28, 2021, Cal/OSHA’s Standards Board – a seven member body appointed by the Governor that is responsible for adopting “reasonable and enforceable standards” for the agency – published proposed amendments to the Cal/OSHA COVID-19 Emergency Temporary Standards (ETS) currently applicable to most worksites. Though many thought Cal/OSHA would fall in line with the California state guidance saying that vaccinated employees do not need not to wear masks or physically separate indoors as of June 15 (and leaving it up to employers to figure out how to determine who is vaccinated and who is not), Cal/OSHA appears to be leaning in a different direction.

Face coverings required indefinitely for indoor worksites

If the Standards Board approves the proposed amendments to the ETS at its upcoming June 3 meeting, Cal/OSHA will continue to require face coverings for all indoor worksites, with no end date specified. Employers will have to provide and “ensure” employees wear face coverings indoors, unless all persons “in a room” are fully vaccinated and do not have COVID-19 symptoms. In that case, the employees in that room don’t have to wear face coverings.

Otherwise, with only relatively minor exceptions for employees who cannot wear face coverings due to medical or mental health conditions or disabilities, or for tasks that cannot be performed while wearing a face covering, face coverings will be required indoors without regard to vaccination status.

For outdoor worksites, employees must wear face coverings if they are within six feet of other persons unless they are fully vaccinated and do not have COVID-19 symptoms (of course, under the ETS, employers should keep any employees who have COVID-19 symptoms away from the work place in any event).Continue Reading Cal/OSHA Signals That It Intends to Require Masks and Physical Distancing Throughout the Summer — In Stark Contrast to California’s Targeted Reopening Date of June 15

On May 18, 2021, Santa Clara County became among the first jurisdictions in the world to issue an Order requiring employers to determine if employees are vaccinated. Santa Clara County employers will need to move quickly, because the Order requires compliance within two weeks.

Here’s what Santa Clara County employers need to know now to…

In brief

The California Supreme Court recently established new law on two important topics for meal period compliance and litigation. Donohue v. AMN Services, LLC (2021) San Diego Superior Court, Case No. S253677 (February 25, 2021). First, the Court held that California employers cannot round time punches for meal periods. Second, the Court held that time records showing noncompliant meal periods raise a rebuttable presumption of meal period violations. The Donohue Court also implicitly approved a method for employers to use to determine whether meal period premiums should be paid for missed, short or late meal periods.Continue Reading California Rejects Meal Period Rounding

As previously covered, California reinstated and expanded COVID-19 supplemental paid sick leave last week. For more on the law’s requirements, click here.

The new law requires employers to give employees notice of the leave benefit:

  • The California Labor Commissioner has issued a model poster available here and FAQs are available here.
  • The poster

…

Last Friday, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed Senate Bill 95 into law, providing California employees with up to two weeks of supplemental paid sick leave (SPSL) for COVID-19 absences, including paid time off for vaccination. The new law reinstates and expands the prior California supplemental paid sick leave law that expired on December 31, 2020…

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.Continue Reading US Pay Equity and Transparency Developments: What You Need to Know Going Into 2021

After the fastest reported increase in coronavirus cases since the start of the pandemic- with new infections doubling in the past 10 days-California Governor Newsom “sound[ed] the alarm,” announcing on November 16 that 40 counties are moving in the wrong direction under the state’s reopening plan. Twenty-eight counties moved into the state’s most restrictive purple tier under California’s Blueprint for a Safer Economy, signifying that the coronavirus is “widespread.” Now, 41 of the state’s 58 counties are purple, a stark contrast from only 13 purple tier counties last week.

Several Bay Area and Southern California counties are affected:

  • Alameda, Contra Costa, Santa Clara, Napa and Solano counties are reverting to the purple tier, while San Francisco, Marin and San Mateo counties are stepping back into the second-most restrictive red tier (indicating “substantial” virus spread).
  • Orange and Ventura counties-which improved to red in September and October, respectively-are retreating to purple, joining Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, Ventura, Santa Barbara, and San Bernardino counties in the purple tier.

California employers and employees are already feeling the effects. Purple status severely limits indoor activity, including:

  • Restricting capacity at retail establishments and malls (open indoors at 25% capacity);
  • Moving fitness centers, family entertainment, and movie theaters to outdoor only;
  • Limiting restaurants and wineries to limited outdoor-only service;
  • Closing bars and breweries;
  • Requiring schools to remain online only; and
  • Requiring non-essential offices to work remotely.

With 94% of the state’s population now in the purple tier, talk of curfews, and restrictions being one step away from the stay-at-home orders that swept the US in March, the scaled back reopening undoubtedly will have devastating economic impacts on businesses and their employees.Continue Reading California “Sounds the Alarm,” Stepping Back into Purple and Issuing a Travel Advisory

As the clock strikes midnight on New Year’s Eve 2020, sweeping amendments to California’s Family Rights Act (CFRA) will take effect. Both the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and the current version of CFRA entitle eligible employees to take up to 12 weeks of unpaid, job-protected family or medical leave during a 12-month period. This statutory leave right provides employees with time off from work for the birth, adoption or foster care placement of a child, to care for an immediate family member (spouse, child or parent) with a serious health condition, or when the employee cannot work because of a serious health condition.

Effective January 1, 2021, however, not only will the CFRA apply to more employers (covering employers with as few as five instead of the current 50 employees), but CFRA’s expanded definition of “family members” also will authorize certain employees to take a total of 24 weeks of family and medical leave, effectively doubling the currently available 12 weeks of leave available, in each 12-month period.

We highlight the key changes to the CFRA and employer considerations below.Continue Reading Sweeping Changes to the CFRA Could Entitle Employees to Double the Leave