On June 29, 2024, Governor Newsom signed into law an amendment to California Code 1770, clarifying the scope of SB 478. Under SB 478 and previously published guidance from the attorney general, California restaurants were effectively prohibited from charging service fees or other surcharges, which many restaurants have implemented to offset rising costs, unless the amount of the service fee was specifically identified as part of the listed prices.

Voters in several states will decide whether marijuana or, in one case, psychedelic substances should be legal in the upcoming November 5, 2024 general election. Employers should keep their eyes on these ballot measures and prepare for questions regarding changes to workplace policies if some or all of them pass. A rundown of the ballot measures in these jurisdictions follows.

Marshall v. Mercantile Exchange Corporation, 2024 CanLII 71128  (ONSC), is an action for wrongful dismissal where the employee claimed he could not mitigate his damages by seeking alternative employment indefinitely because of a mental health condition (i.e., stress and depression) allegedly arising out of his termination. He claimed a 26-month notice period. The employer sought an independent medical examination (IME) of the employee pursuant to s.

A number of Littler lawyers in our office in Toronto, Ontario, Canada recently authored the Ontario section of Employment: North America for Lexology, Getting The Deal Through.

This publication provides an overview of labour and employment law in Ontario, Canada, focusing on the following categories: 

Employers with employees in Ontario often ask about legislative requirements under various employment statutes, including mandatory policies, training and postings under the Employment Standards Act, 2000, the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997, the Occupational Health and Safety Act, the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005, the Pay Equity Act, and the Smoke-Free Ontario Act, 2017.  To make this information conveniently available, the Littler Toronto office assembled these requirements in a single publication. 

Employers with employees in Ontario often ask about legislative requirements under various employment statutes, including mandatory policies, training and postings under the Employment Standards Act, 2000, the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997, the Occupational Health and Safety Act, the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005, the Pay Equity Act, and the Smoke-Free Ontario Act, 2017.  To make this information conveniently available, the Littler Toronto office assembled these requirements in a single publication. 

Employers subject to provincial legislation (i.e., not federal employers) that have employees in Ontario often ask about legislative requirements under various employment statutes, including mandatory policies, training, postings, and information sheets under the Employment Standards Act, 2000, the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997, the Occupational Health and Safety Act, the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005, the Pay Equity Act, the Smoke-Free Ontario Act, 2017, the Working for Workers Act, 2021, a

After more than a year of a crushing global pandemic, the early summer brought hope for a long-anticipated return to normal business operations, at least in the United States. But those plans were derailed by the rapid spread of the highly contagious delta variant and mounting COVID-19 infections. The abrupt change left companies – many of which had just updated plans with an eye toward a post-pandemic future – scrambling to adjust policies on such pressing issues as vaccination, return-to-office timing and mask wearing.

Two new laws will take effect next year that restrict how employers may respond to worker off-duty cannabis use.  One law will restrict employers’ ability to ask about prior cannabis use in the hiring process, and the other will limit employer actions based on positive marijuana drug tests.

On November 10, 2021, the IRS released Revenue Procedure 2021-45, which contains its annual inflation adjustments for over 60 tax provisions, including not only individual income tax rates and deductions, but also many employer-provided benefits.

We recently reported on the saga that followed the Constitutional Court's ruling of February 8, 2024 on the conditions for applying the partial exemption from payment of withholding tax for employers organizing shift work (CIR/92, art. 275/5). 

The ruling of February 8, 2024, had given rise to fears among many employers whose successive shifts fluctuate in size that they would simply lose the tax advantage, which can represent a reduction of 10 to 15% in the wage costs associated with shift workers. 

On November 9, 2021, in United Food and Commercial Workers Union, Canada Local 333 v.

The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario recently held a preliminary hearing to determine whether allegations made under the Human Rights Code (Code) fell within the exclusive jurisdiction of a labour arbitrator, or whether the Tribunal had concurrent jurisdiction over employment-related human rights matters in a unionized workplace.  

On April 12, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court addressed whether the Federal Arbitration Act’s (FAA) transportation exemption—meaning the FAA would not apply—only relates to workers within the transportation industry. In Bissonnette v. LePage Bakeries Park St., LLC,¹ the Supreme Court unanimously held Section 1 of the FAA exempts classes of workers who are actively engaged in interstate transportation, even if the individuals are not employed by a company in the transportation industry (the “Transportation Exemption”).

In the midst of declining infection rates and increasing debate over mask and vaccine mandates, on February 7, 2022, Sangamon County Circuit Court Judge Raylene DeWitte Grischow temporarily enjoined COVID-19 mitigation measure mandates that had been imposed by order of Governor Pritzker and related administrative agency rules, affecting nearly 170 school districts. Echoing the concern expressed by the Eleventh Circuit, in its December 2021 Georgia v.

UPDATE: On March 21, 2024, Ontario’s Bill 149 - Working for Workers Four Act, 2024 received Royal Assent. The amendments to the ESA made by Bill 149 came into force on the day it received Royal Assent, with the following exceptions:

Rhonda B. Levy and Monty Verlint explain Ontario's Bill 79, Working for Workers Act, 2023.

SHRM Online

View (Subscription required.)

In a significant decision about workplace drug use, the Connecticut Appellate Court backed an employer’s right to terminate a worker who was impaired on the job by medical marijuana. The decision also clarified the factual basis an employer must possess to justify ordering a drug test based on suspicion of impairment.

Felicia Watson discusses three concerns about a proposed OSHA rule that would protect indoor and outdoor workers from heat illness.

SHRM

View (Subscription required)

In R. v. Greater Sudbury (City), 2024 ONSC 3959, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (OSCJ) dismissed an appeal of the trial judge’s decision in which she acquitted the City of Sudbury (City) of various charges under the Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA).

Grant Goerke and Jennifer Chierek Znosko discuss a recent federal court decision that agreed an Illinois employer had the right to enforce a zero-tolerance policy on marijuana use.

Westlaw Today

View (Subscription required)

On page 54, Eric Stevens urges bank executives to begin preparing now for changes to employee data reporting in 2018 by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.  

The Tennessee Banker

View Article

Jim Paretti talks about submitting workforce data correctly on EEO-1 reports.

SHRM Online

View (Subscription required.)

(July 24, 2024) – Littler, the world’s largest employment and labor law practice representing management, has named new office managing shareholders (OMS) in Indianapolis; Denver; Portland, Oregon; San Diego and San Jose.

Stacey James and Jamie L. Santos discuss a California amendment that seeks to allow restaurants to support higher wages and benefits while clearly disclosing service fees to consumers upfront.

Wolters Kluwer

View (Subscription required)