On July 16, 2015, AB 987 was signed into law by the Governor Jerry Brown which provides a paradigm shift in favor of employees with respect to their retaliation claims. The new law overturns the retaliation holding in Rope v. Auto-Chlor System of Washington, Inc. (2013) 220 Cal.App.4th 635, and makes it unlawful for an employer to retaliate or otherwise discriminate against a person for “requesting” an accommodation based on religion or disability.  Continue Reading California Legislature Overturns Retaliation Holding in Rope v. Auto-Chlor and Classifies a Mere Request for Accommodation as a “Protected Activity”

On July 15, Governor Jerry Brown signed into law AB 202, which requires California-based minor or major league sport teams in certain sports to treat cheerleaders as employees, not independent contractors. AB 202 defined California-based sport team as either a minor- or major-league-level team in the sport of baseball, basketball, football, ice hockey, or soccer. “California-based team” means a team that plays a majority of its home games in California. Employers affected by this new law should consult with their local counsel.

Significant amendments to California’s Healthy Workplaces, Healthy Families Act of 2014, also known as the California Paid Sick Leave Law, went into effect immediately upon Governor Jerry Brown’s signature on Assembly Bill no. 304 on July 13, 2015.

Key provisions of the Amendment affect calculation of the rate of pay, method of accrual of paid leave, and recordkeeping. Continue Reading Amendments to California Paid Sick Leave Law Effective

Originally posted by Business and Legal Resources. To view the original post, please click here.

Free live webinar: Wednesday, July 15, 2015

10:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. Pacific

According to a Rand Corporation study, injury and illness prevention program (IIIP) violations occur in about 25% of all California workplace health and safety inspections. The report also notes that since the IIPP requirement went into effect in 1991, it’s been the most frequently cited standard in California workplace health and safety inspections nearly every year. Continue Reading Free Live Webinar! Injury and Illness Prevention Programs: How to Develop an Effective IIPP and Comply with Cal/OSHA’s Most Frequently Violated Standard

The proposed amendments to the San Francisco Formula Retail Worker Bill of Rights, listed below, have passed. In addition, the OLSE has issued FAQs (click here to download) and a template notice of rights (click here to download) which must be posted by covered employers. Per the Office of Labor Standards Enforcement (OLSE), both of these linked documents will be modified to reflect the changes to the law. Continue Reading San Francisco Formula Retail Worker Bill of Rights: Update as of July 9, 2015

The final vote on the proposed amendments to the San Francisco Formula Retail Worker Bill of Rights has been delayed until July 7, 2015. The amendments include a three-month grace period along with several other changes: Continue Reading San Francisco Formula Retail Worker Bill of Rights: Update as of July 1, 2015

Originally posted by Human Resource Executive, the premier publication focused on strategic issues in HR. To view the original post, please click here.

A new set of ordinances that restrict San Francisco retailers in how they manage the scheduling and staffing of their establishments is about to go into effect—and experts say retailers in other parts of the United States had better be paying attention. Continue Reading Spreading Eastward? A controversial new measure in San Francisco will impose new regulatory burdens on retailers there. But its supporters say it—and similar measures being debated elsewhere—are good for employees and for business.

Our California Summer E-Series Webinar, Managing Employee Leave in the Golden State Paid Sick Leave, CFRA, FEHA and Many More, is now posted for review. This webinar session outlines best practices for managing leaves, including California’s new paid sick leave mandates, employee leaves of absence, health issues, family issues and pregnancy, just to name a few.

Please visit www.jacksonlewis.com/webinars to download and view the webinar and contact our speakers with any questions:

Lenny Schloss | (213) 689-0404 | Leonora.Schloss@jacksonlewis.com

Cynthia Filla | (213) 689-0404 | FillaC@jacksonlewis.com

This week, in Aro v. Legal Recovery Law Offices, Inc., California Court of Appeal affirmed an intentional infliction of emotional distress award in favor of two employees who were pressured into taking a random, “on-demand” drug test.

The facts

Prior to the drug test at issue, the employer provided employees a revised 2011 employee manual stating, in pertinent part, that the Company reserves the right to test employees for the use of illegal drugs or alcohol where an employee’s job carriers a risk of injury or accident, or after an accident or probable cause. The Plaintiffs were provided the revised handbook containing the drug test policy by e-mail. However, when they asked what changes were made to the handbook, management advised that they should read it and “figure it out” themselves. Continue Reading Employer to Pay for Emotional Distress Triggered by Random Workplace Drug Testing

In a wage-and-hour class action filed by food and beverage vendors working in California entertainment arenas, the California Court of Appeal has ruled that a state Labor Code provision making it unlawful for any employer to “engage” in the willful misclassification of an individual as an independent contractor applies not only to the employer actually making the misclassification, but also to any employer who is aware that the co-employer has willfully misclassified their joint employees and fails to remedy the misclassification. Noe v. Superior Court (Levy Premium Foodservice Ltd. P’ship), No. B259570 (Cal. Ct. App. June 1, 2015). However, the Court also held that an employer could not be held jointly liable under Labor Code Section 226.8 based solely on the acts of a co-employer and that the law does not provide a private right of action for enforcement.  Continue Reading Joint Employers Can be Held Liable for Employee Misclassification, California Court Rules