NY State Bans Discrimination Based on Religious Attire, Clothing, and Facial Hair

By Wendy Lario and Courteney Lario on Posted in Discrimination, GT Alert

On August 9, 2019, New York state amended its Human Rights Law (NYSHRL) to expressly include the workplace protection of religious attire, clothing, and facial hair. The law becomes effective in sixty (60) days, on October 8, 2019.

While religious discrimination has long been outlawed under both state and federal law, this amendment makes clear that the definition of religion in New York state’s existing anti-discrimination statute includes bias against any employee’s religious clothing, facial hair, or attire.

Click here for the full GT Alert.

Chicago ‘Fair Workweek’ Ordinance Requires Employers to Provide Scheduling Notice to Covered Employees

By Jill A. Dougherty on Posted in Compensation, Employee Policies, Employment Agreement, Fair Workweek, Illinois, Wage & Hour, wages

On July 24, 2019, the city of Chicago enacted the Chicago Fair Workweek Ordinance, intended to “enact and enforce fair and equitable employment scheduling practices in the City of Chicago…” Most provisions of the Ordinance go into effect on July 1, 2020.

The Ordinance covers employers primarily engaged in building services, health care, hotel, manufacturing, restaurant, retail and warehouse services industries and who employ 100 or more employees (250 or more employees for not-for-profit corporations), at least 50 of whom are considered “Covered Employees.” A Covered Employee spends the majority of his or her time at work in a covered industry while physically present in the city of Chicago and who earns $50,000 or less per year as a salaried employee, or $26.00 or less per hour as an hourly employee. For purposes of meeting these minimums, the number of Covered Employees is aggregated if they are employed by members of a unitary business group for Illinois income tax purposes.

The Ordinance covers restaurants only if the business has at least 30 locations and 250 employees. Restaurant businesses having three or fewer locations in the city under a sole franchise are exempt from coverage. In addition, there are certain other exceptions for employees who self-schedule or who work at certain types of venues or events.

Click here for the full GT Alert, which covers the requirements of the Ordinance, rights of Covered Employees, and enforcement and penalties.

New Jersey Implements Steep Sanctions for Wage Payment Violations

By Courteney Lario, Wendy Lario and Kristine Feher on Posted in GT Alert, Labor & Employment, New Jersey, State Law, Wage & Hour, wage theft, wages

On Aug. 6, 2019, New Jersey Acting Gov. Sheila Oliver signed a new “wage theft” law that expands the fines, penalties, and damages to be imposed for violations of the state’s wage payment law for an extended six-year statute of limitations period. The law takes effect immediately. In this GT Alert we explore the new law’s civil and criminal penalties for violators, additional retaliation protection, the expansive application of the new law, and key takeaways for employers.

Click here for the full GT Alert.

California Adopts Emergency Regulation to Protect Outdoor Workers From Wildfire Smoke

By Michael Taylor and Adam Roseman on Posted in California, GT Alert, OSHA, State Law

Last year was the most destructive fire season in California’s history. Over 7,600 wildfires burned nearly two million acres. As a result, on July 18, the California Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) Occupational Safety Health Standards Board adopted an emergency regulation to protect workers from hazards associated with wildfire smoke. The regulation is now in effect, following its approval on July 29, 2019, by the Office of Administrative Law.

The emergency regulation will be effective for one year, and applies where the current Air Quality Index (AQI) for airborne particulate matter (PM) 2.5 is 151 or greater (the AQI scale is from 0 to 500, and a 151 AQI is considered “unhealthy”), or where employers should reasonably anticipate that employees could be exposed to wildfire smoke.

Click here for the full GT Alert.

Out-of-State Workers Can Assert Claims Under New Jersey Anti-Discrimination Law

By Michael J. Slocum and Katarina S. Kingston on Posted in Discrimination, GT Alert, New Jersey

On June 27, 2019, New Jersey’s Appellate Division ruled that New Jersey’s Law Against Discrimination (NJLAD) can extend “in appropriate circumstances” to plaintiffs who reside or work outside of the state where New Jersey has the “most significant relationship” to the claims. Calabotta v. Phibro Animal Health Corp., et al.

In 2008, New Jersey-based Phibro Animal Health Corporation hired plaintiff David Calabotta to serve as vice president of marketing and technology deployment for Prince Agri Products Incorporated, a Phibro subsidiary located in Quincy, Illinois.

In June 2016, Phibro created a new position based at its headquarters in New Jersey for a senior vice president of marketing and product management. Plaintiff alleged that despite expressing interest in the new position, he was not interviewed because of his wife’s terminal breast cancer diagnosis. Plaintiff was terminated in August 2016, following allegations he acted inappropriately at a national conference.

Plaintiff filed a complaint in the Superior Court of New Jersey against Phibro, his supervisor, and the senior VP of human resources, who investigated the allegations and terminated his employment. Plaintiff alleged defendants discriminated against him in violation of NJLAD “on account of his association with a person with a disability” when (1) they refused to consider him for a promotion in New Jersey, and (2) they subsequently terminated his employment. The trial court originally dismissed plaintiff’s complaint, reasoning he had no viable cause of action under NJLAD as an Illinois resident who worked for the company’s subsidiary in Illinois.

Click here for the full GT Alert, which summarizes the Appellate Division’s decision.

Recapping the Many Legal Developments Affecting Private Employers in New York and New Jersey, So Far, in 2019

By Robert Bernstein, Mark D. Lurie, Michael J. Slocum, Noel A. Lesica, Christopher Katsimagles, Katarina S. Kingston and Ryan P. O'Connor on Posted in Labor & Employment, New Jersey, New York Department of Labor, NLRB, Sexual Harrassment, State Law

There have been many significant developments in the first half of 2019 impacting private employers in New York and New Jersey. Federal, state, and local legislatures and agencies have been particularly busy in the employment arena, promulgating sweeping laws and regulations affecting a broad range of well-entrenched employment practices. For instance, New Jersey adopted prohibitions against non-disclosure provisions in settlement agreements resolving discrimination and harassment claims (with, as discussed in this GT Alert, New York expected to follow shortly), and New York enacted its Gender Expression Non-Discrimination Act.

So too have our courts been active, rendering decisions fleshing out some of these recent laws, as well as revisiting other, more familiar questions under longstanding principles. If you overlooked any of these developments, or need a quick and easy reference of what has occurred and what is on the horizon, we hope this topline recap helps.

Click here to read the full GT Alert.

Nevada Mandates Paid Time Off for Workers

By Tami Cowden on Posted in GT Alert, Labor & Employment, Legislation, Nevada, Paid Leave, Retaliation, wages

On June 13, 2019, Nevada Governor Steve Sisolak signed SB 312 into law to require Nevada employers to provide paid leave to workers. Specifically, the bill requires that employees receive 0.01923 hours of paid leave for each hour worked. Under this formula, a worker who works 40 hours per week for 52 weeks will be entitled to approximately 40 hours of paid leave. Workers must receive the same rate of pay for the paid leave as paid for hours worked, and be paid at the same time they would have been paid had the hours been worked.

With passage of the bill, Nevada joins seven other states that have mandated paid time off: Arizona, California, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington.

  • Who will be required to provide paid time off to employees?
  • What obligations are placed on employers?
  • What rules may employers impose?
  • What restrictions are imposed on employers?
  • What obligations do employees have?
  • How will the requirement be enforced?
  • When does the requirement for paid leave go into effect?

Click here for the full GT Alert, which answers these questions.

Greenberg Traurig Attorneys Recognized by Human Resource Executive Lawdragon

By Greenberg Traurig on Posted in Awards and Accolades

Twelve attorneys from global law firm Greenberg Traurig, LLP were recognized by Human Resource Executive in a 2019 report researched by the Lawdragon organization. Human Resource Executive and Lawdragon, a networking site for lawyers and clients, conduct research to identify “the most powerful attorneys for employment law, benefits law, traditional labor and employment law, and immigration law.”

In 2019, Kate Kalmykov joins the “Nation’s 20 Most Powerful Employment Attorneys – Immigration.” In addition, Naomi G. Beer, Mark D. Kemple, and Todd D. Wozniak join the “Nation’s 100 Most Powerful Employment Attorneys.” Kalmykov and Wozniak were recognized on the list of the “Nation’s 40 Most Powerful Employment Attorneys – Up-and-Comers” in 2018.

To read the full release, click here.

Greenberg Traurig Attorneys Recognized by Human Resource Executive Lawdragon

2019 Mexican Federal Labor Law Amendment

By José Carlos M. de Uriarte on Posted in GT Alert, Unions

On May 1, 2019, Mexico’s Federal Official Gazette published a decree setting forth major amendments to Mexico’s Federal Labor Law (FLL) (Decree). The Decree follows and articulates the February 2017 amendment to the Federal Constitution that, among other things, (i) confirmed union freedom and confidential voting by union members, (ii) set forth the creation of labor courts to replace the conciliation and arbitration boards as the entities in charge of labor and employment dispute resolution, and (iii) provided for the creation of an autonomous entity to rule collective labor issues.

To read the full GT Alert, click here.

For more on Unions, click here.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) Reinstates Collection of EEO-1 Component 2 Data: Pay Data Collection for Calendar Years 2017 and 2018

By David Long-Daniels and M. Allyson Lumpkin on Posted in EEOC, GT Alert

September is coming, and a chilly wind is blowing for employers with more than 100 employees. By Sept. 30, 2019, employers must submit EEO-1 Component 2 data, employee wage and hour data organized by job category, gender, race, and ethnicity, for calendar years 2017 and 2018 to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). A 2017 moratorium on the EEOC’s collection of employee pay data was lifted in a recent court order that requires the EEOC to collect employee pay data by the end of September. While the EEOC has not yet set a firm date for when employers will be able to submit EEO-1 Component 2 data, the EEOC expects the EEO-1 Component 2 Survey to open in mid-July 2019.

Because the EEOC is not currently accepting Component 2 data, it is unclear what the EEO-1 Component 2 Survey will look like. However, the EEO-1 Component 2 form is expected to require employers to submit summary pay data for all employees, including the total number of full and part-time employees employed during the year, in each of 12 pay bands listed for each job category identified on the EEO-1 form. The pay data submitted is to be based on employee W-2 forms. The form is expected to be designed so that employers may simply count and report the number of employees in each pay band. The form is not expected to require employers to submit individual pay or salary data. Additionally, the form is expected to require employers to submit the number of hours worked during the year by employees in each pay band.

To read the full GT Alert, click here.

For more on EEOC, click here.

 

LexBlog