California businesses that have 50 or more employees are already required to train supervisors on legally prohibited sexual harassment. Following California Governor Jerry Brown’s recent signing of A.B. 2053, that training must now also include education on preventing “abusive conduct” in the workplace, even if the conduct is not based on a protected characteristic nor constitutes legally prohibited discrimination or harassment.
As amended by
On September 9, 2014, California Governor Jerry Brown signed A.B. 1443, which extends the state’s anti-harassment and anti-discrimination protections to unpaid interns.
Employers are now prohibited from discrimination based on protected characteristics in the “selection, termination, training or other terms” of unpaid interns. A.B. 1443 also prohibits harassment of unpaid interns based on protected characteristics, and it makes employers liable for sexual harassment of
On September 10th, California became the second state in the country to require businesses to provide employees with paid sick leave, following Governor Jerry Brown’s signing of A.B. 1522, which goes into effect on July 1, 2015, and will be known as the Healthy Workplaces, Healthy Families Act of 2014.
Click here to read our detailed post about A.B. 1522.
Charles Schwab announced last week that it is planning to move “a significant number of San Francisco-based jobs” out of state over the next three to five years. According to a recent article in Forbes, “Observers close to the situation blame the city’s extreme payroll tax and high cost of doing business in California as the reasons for the company’s exodus.” The article notes that
A bill that would have allowed California employers to offer employees a flexible workweek schedule has failed to pass the California Assembly Committee on Labor and Employment in a 5-2 party-line vote. The Committee rejected Assembly Bill 907 on the ground that the proposed law would “lead to employee intimidation and a breakdown of the eight-hour work day.” The bill, which was opposed by Democrats
The California Chamber of Commerce has just released its annual list of “job killer” bills that have been proposed in the California Legislature. This year’s list identifies 32 proposed laws, including six new “Costly Workplace Mandates.”
Chamber President and CEO Allan Zaremberg cautioned against “increase[d] uncertainty for employers and investors and . . . higher costs of doing business” while employers already face “higher health care premiums, higher workers’ compensation premiums, increased unemployment insurance taxes, and general tax increases.”
Over the past two weeks, the United States Supreme Court has repeatedly underscored the importance of having common questions that are susceptible to common answers in cases where plaintiffs are seeking class certification. Most recently, the Court clarified that this requirement, which has now been considered in both antitrust and employment cases, applies with respect to both merits and damages issues. As discussed below, this clarification presents employers with a potent new tool in the defense of class action wage-and-hour cases.
On March 27, 2013, the Court issued its decision in Comcast Corporation v. Behrend, a putative antitrust class action brought on behalf of 2 million cable subscribers in 649 franchise areas alleging overcharging through an alleged attempted monopoly. In considering whether the class should be certified, the Court held that the need for individualized inquiries with respect to damages issues precluded class certification. (Opinion available here.) Moreover, the Court stressed that lower courts must perform a probing analysis when deciding whether to certify a class in order to ensure the existence of common answers to common questions.
Valentine’s Day has generated many stories on workplace romances. Here are two articles — How to (Legally) Hit on Your Co-Worker and Afternoon Sex, Affairs Can Be Part of Life on the Road — with comments from Tony Oncidi, a Proskauer partner.
California Governor Jerry Brown has signed a new law protecting employee use of social media by prohibiting an employer from requiring or requesting an employee or applicant for employment to disclose a username or password for the purpose of accessing the employee’s personal social media. Additionally, an employer may not require an employee or applicant to divulge any personal social media unless the employer reasonably
With California’s unemployment rate hovering around 11%, both employees and employers are sensitive to proposed legislature that could further increase the burdens on businesses and hamper economic growth. With these concerns in mind,the California Chamber of Commerce has released it’s annual a list of “Job Killer Bills,” which consists of 23 proposed laws that could negatively impact economic and job growth in California.
Included in