Rhonda B. Levy and Douglas Sanderson examine The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario preliminary hearing to determine whether allegations made under the Human Rights 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. 

Human Resources Director Canada

New York State Governor Kathy Hochul recently signed into law eight pieces of legislation designed to combat human trafficking. These laws require many hospitality industry employers to provide specific anti-human-trafficking awareness training to employees. They also require certain hospitality and transportation industry employers to post information regarding services available to human trafficking victims.

Philip Gordon suggests steps that employers should take in response to the privacy act.

SHRM Online

View Article 

In an age where computer generated imagery (CGI) and digital effects enable entire film genres to exist, like Marvel’s superhero series the Avengers or Guardians of the Galaxy, audiences have no expectation that movies they consume depict actual events or reflect reality. It is therefore reasonable to assume that the context and forum of how digital media and information is communicated, observed and consumed informs our default expectations of it.

Happy New Year! As we turn the calendar to 2019, employers across the country are taking stock of recently-enacted workplace regulations on a wide variety of topics.¹

Employers in the Golden State, in particular, have a lot to juggle: new governor, new legislative session, and dozens of new labor and employment laws taking effect as of January 1.² These statutes touch on numerous issues, ranging from lactation accommodation to meal breaks for certain commercial drivers.³

Effective January 1, 2019, California SB 1343 greatly expanded Golden State employers' anti-harassment training requirements. The law not only extends coverage to employers with more than five employees, but it also mandates that employers provide anti-harassment training to all employees – not just supervisors – every two years. But what if an employer provided this training in 2018? Can the next training cycle wait until 2020? No, according to recent guidance from the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH).

Last year, California enacted SB 1343,¹ amending California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) to expand employers' sexual harassment training requirements.  Previously, employers with 50 or more employees had to provide their supervisory personnel with two hours of sexual harassment prevention training every two years.

Bruce Sarchet, of Littler’s Workplace Policy Institute, and Marissa Dragoo with the Littler Learning Group, take a look at a new type of workplace training – bystander intervention training – that is now encouraged for California employers. This optional training teaches employees how to evaluate and respond to problematic behaviors in the workplace, empowering them to interrupt difficult situations, such as sexual harassment.
 

On August 30, 2019, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed Senate Bill 778, revising mandatory anti-harassment training deadlines, and resolving confusion about retraining requirements for certain employees who already received training in 2018 or 2019.

Helene Wasserman, Los Angeles-based Littler Shareholder and Trial Practice Group Co-Chair, reflects on some good, bad, and ugly impacts of the #MeToo movement since its inception, including recent legislative developments affecting California employers in particular. Discussing training, arbitration agreements, and the extended statute of limitations for FEHA claims with Littler Learning Group’s Marissa Dragoo, Helene provides insights and guidance for California employers as we move into the third year of the cemented #MeToo movement.
 

Alex MacDonald explains why natural labor law and principles may soon return to center stage in the legal world. 

North Dakota Law Review

View

On February 26, 2024, the California Supreme Court issued its opinion in Tricoast Builders, Inc. v. Fonnegra, No. S273368 (Cal. Feb. 26, 2024). For employers, the most important takeaway from this case is that the court held a litigant’s waiver of the right to a jury trial can be conclusive if a party seeking reversal of the waiver cannot demonstrate it caused prejudice to the party. The decision makes it more difficult for a party to convince a court to let it back out of a jury trial waiver in a civil case.

Background

In a favorable ruling for employers defending against wage statement compliance claims, the California Supreme Court in Naranjo v. Spectrum Services Inc. (Naranjo) settled an age-old dispute by determining that an employer that reasonably and in good faith believed it was providing a complete and accurate wage statement has a viable defense to a claim for penalties under the California wage statement statute.

Background

What do you get when you combine a business-backed ballot initiative, the state legislature and governor’s office, and labor organizations? A deal. California style.

Marlene Muraco, Angela Rafoth and Emily Mertes discuss reforms to California's Private Attorneys General Act that address challenges and ambiguities faced by both courts and employers in the 20-year-old law.

Westlaw Today

View (Subscription required.)

Philadelphia has imposed significant new recall and retention obligations on hotel, airport hospitality, and event center businesses as they struggle to recover in this uncertain COVID-19 economy.  The new obligations are contained in a legislative package, styled as the Black Workers Matter Economic Recovery Package, which became law in Januar

Just about a year ago, in the early weeks of the COVID-19 pandemic, economic activity in many sectors went from red hot to nearly frozen, seemingly overnight.  The hospitality industry was particularly hard hit, as business and leisure travel evaporated.  Many businesses were forced to lay off workers, and California’s unemployment soared.

The Governor of Nevada recently signed into law Senate Bill 386, which is Nevada’s version of the trending “return to work” or “right to recall” laws being passed in other jurisdictions throughout the country in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.  These laws typically require that employees who were laid off due to the pandemic be given priority to be offered their former jobs before external candidates are considered.  Nevada’s law, the Nevada Hospitality and Travel Workers Right to Return Act (“the Act”), does not apply to all businesses, but generally to such businesses that were most a

Over the past few years, cities have started to implement workplace regulation, an area previously reserved to federal and state governments.  The hotel industry, which often is one of the primary drivers of a local economy, has been a particular focus.

California is at it again – adopting a host of new labor and employment laws that will further regulate and complicate business operations in the Golden State.  Littler’s Workplace Policy Institute has been tracking these bills as they worked their way through the legislature and been signed into law by Governor Newsom.  The new California laws are summarized briefly below.  Also, please join us at our annual webinar on October 19, 2022, in wh

In 2019, California adopted several laws that restricted “non-disclosure" provisions in employment-related agreements.  Those laws, passed in the wake of the “me too” movement, limited non-disclosure provisions in settlement agreements for lawsuits and administrative agency charges involving allegations of sexual harassment.¹  They also limited the use of non-disclosure provisions in exchange for a raise or a bonus, or as a co

Javier Thibault weighs in on the Spanish parliament’s recent labor reform agreement and its effects on the recovery and the labor market. 

Confilegal

View

Michael Lotito weighs in on a New York measure that would establish a policy-making council that would set rules on pay, safety and working conditions "as reasonably necessary" to protect worker welfare.

Law360 Employment Authority

View (Subscription required.)

Denise Visconti offers tips to help employers navigate California’s SB 1162, which will require employers to disclose median and mean hourly rates and pay information on contractors, starting in May 2023.

Law360 Employment Authority

View (Subscription required.)

Joy Rosenquist offers employers tips to manage compliance challenges that may arise from California’s new regulations that are designed to increase pay transparency.

WorldatWork

View

On January 8, 2021, the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) issued its final rule modifying the calculation of withdrawal liability by multiemployer pension plans.  This final rule amends the agency’s regulations on allocating unfunded vested benefits to withdrawing employers (29 C.F.R. § 4211) and notice, collection, and redetermination of withdrawal liability (29 C.F.R. § 4219).

Nicole LeFave, Vinay Patel and Garrick Chan share their experience with Jenny Schwendemann of working on a collaborative effort through the Law Firm Antiracism Alliance.

Littler attorneys provide pro bono services in a variety of areas, depending on the interests of individual attorneys. The firm values and encourages the community-minded and pro bono efforts of our lawyers and staff.
  

Last fall, California enacted Senate Bill 525, which substantially raises the base minimum wage for health care workers over time to $25 per hour.  The first incremental increase above the general state minimum wage was scheduled to occur on June 1, 2024.  However, there were several delays and amendments to the law due to its impact on the California budget.  After the last delay in late June, health care employers did not have a clear answer t

Ole Kristian Olsby and Nina Elisabeth Thjømøe explain the regulations around gender equality and discrimination in the workplace.

International Law Office (ILO)

View Article (Subscription required.)

In celebration of Pride Month, Whitney Williams (L.A. – Century City) and Michael Hui (San Francisco) discuss their personal experiences growing up gay in the Black and Asian American communities, what their similar upbringings have taught them about being an attorney, and how the Littler Pride affinity group is an important part of their lives at the firm.
  

Teresa Trigueros discusses workplace harassment and its protocols.

Confilegal

View

In Schachter v. Citigroup, Inc.,¹ the California Supreme Court rejected claims that an incentive plan that conditioned the earning of restricted stock based on continued service was unlawful where the employee voluntarily elected to participate in the plan, and the employee quit before the date on which the incentive was earned. The plan was lawful even though the incentive plan was funded from wages that the employee would have otherwise received in cash.