Q. When is the deadline for submitting annual pay data reports under California law?

A. In 2021, California passed legislation, requiring private employers with 100 or more employees to submit annual pay data reports to the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) under Government Code Section 12999. Companies must comply if they have more than 100 employees, if any of those employees work in California. According to the FAQs, employers need to include reporting data for California employees only, but they may voluntarily choose to include employees working out of state.

Continue Reading Annual Pay Data Reporting for Large Employers With Any California Employees Due April 1

Q. Does the Workers’ Compensation Act bar a claim for damages under Illinois’ Biometric Privacy Act (BIPA)?

A. The Illinois Supreme Court recently issued an opinion, finding that the Workers’ Compensation Act does not bar a claim for damages under BIPA.

Continue Reading Illinois Supreme Court Rules on Workers’ Compensation Act and BIPA

Q: I read that some major companies no longer drug test applicants for marijuana. What should our company consider as we conduct a review of our workplace drug testing policy for 2022?

A: It is true that a growing number of companies appear to be eliminating workplace drug testing. There are two major reasons: expanding marijuana legalization and the pandemic-era labor shortage.

Continue Reading Change in the Wind: Time for Employers to Review Their 2022 Workplace Drug Testing Policies

Q: Did the U.S. Supreme Court issue a ruling in the challenge to OSHA’s vaccine and testing emergency temporary standard (ETS) and CMS interim final rule (IFR)?

A: Yes. On January 13, the Court granted the applications for stays of the OSHA ETS. Conversely, the Court granted the federal government’s request to overturn the injunctions that had halted the IFR.
Continue Reading US Supreme Court Issues Rulings in Challenge to OSHA Vaccine and Testing ETS and CMS Interim Final Rule

Q. My company uses dash-cams to monitor driver conduct, but the company is not located in Illinois. Do I still have to comply with the Biometric Information Privacy Act?

A. Yes, as long as the company has drivers who are Illinois residents, you must comply with BIPA. The good news, however, is that as long as your company fully complies with the statute, it can continue to use telematics.

Continue Reading Drivers’ Telematics Violates BIPA

Q: Now that 2021 is behind us, what are the new California employment law changes for 2022?

A: While employers continued to grapple with the effects of COVID-19 on their businesses, last year’s California legislative actions led to relatively fewer employment law changes than usual for the upcoming 2022 year. Below find descriptions of new employment-related changes, including new rules for severance agreements, expanded limitations on confidentiality and nondisparagement provisions in settlement agreements, extended recordkeeping requirements, changes to the California Family Rights Act, arbitration, COVID-19 compliance, wage and hour, and industry-specific developments.

Continue Reading Overview of New California Employment Laws

Q: Has New York City provided any additional details on the employer vaccination mandate?

A: As we previously discussed, effective December 27, all private employers in New York City will be required to implement a vaccine mandate for their employees. The policy must provide that all employees who work in-person in a workplace with other co-workers are required to have at least one dose by December 27.

Employers must complete an Affirmation of Compliance with Workplace Vaccination Requirements (available here) and post the completed affirmation in a public place.
Continue Reading NYC Releases Guidance on December 27 Vaccination Mandate

Q: I heard New York City just announced an employer vaccination mandate. What do I need to know?

A: On December 6, Mayor Bill de Blasio announced that effective December 27, all private employers in New York City will be required to implement a vaccine mandate for their employees. Employers will be required to implement a policy under which all employees who work in-person in a workplace with other co-workers are required to have at least one dose by December 27. Although many details have not yet been announced, based on Mayor de Blasio’s comments thus far, no alternate testing option is expected. The mandate is expected to affect approximately 184,000 businesses in New York City.
Continue Reading NYC Implements Employer Vaccination Mandate Effective December 27

Q: Is proof of conspiracy required to state a claim that a no-poach agreement violated antitrust laws?

A: Many recent no-poach agreement antitrust claims have risen within the franchise context, where the alleged agreement was plainly described in the operative franchise agreements. In those cases, the parties fought over what standard of review should apply to the undisputed agreement. However, franchise cases are the exception not the norm. Many, if not most, Sherman Act Section 1 claims rise or fall on the plausibility of the allegations of an agreement, often oral, between the accused firms. Recently, the Ninth Circuit affirmed a district court’s dismissal of a factually threadbare no-poach antitrust claim. In Fonseca v. Hewlett-Packard Co.,[1] a former employee of Hewlett-Packard Co. (HP), who was fired by HP and not hired by one of HP’s competitors, alleged HP had entered into an illegal no-poach agreement with the competitor. Highlighting that no-poach antitrust cases require more than simply allegations of agreements and parallel conduct, the Ninth Circuit upheld the district court’s dismissal because the allegations of a conspiracy did not make sense and were not plausible. The decision serves as a poignant reminder that despite the class action bar’s and various government enforcement agencies’ (FTC, DOJ, and states attorneys general) stated desire to use the antitrust laws to protect employees’ wages and mobility, the law requires sufficient proof of a conspiracy to get beyond the pleadings stage of litigation.
Continue Reading No-Poach Case Against HP Dismissed for Failure to Allege a Plausible Conspiracy

Q: What new employment laws impact Oregon employers?

A. The employment law landscape is shifting in Oregon, with this year’s legislative session bringing several noteworthy changes to the state’s employment laws. In this blog post, we explore some of the more significant changes passed in 2021 and forecast what may come our way in the months ahead.

Continue Reading Oregon Employment Law Update