California is considering a new law (Assembly Bill 331), also known as the Automated Decision Systems Accountability Act. Modeled after the Biden Administration’s Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights (whitehouse.gov), AB 331 would control the use of machine-based systems in making “consequential” employment decisions such as compensation, promotions, hiring, termination, and automated task allocations.
If passed and signed into law, AB
As covered previously here, the California Chamber of Commerce (“Chamber”) once again has identified a handful of “job killer” bills making their way through the legislative process. This year’s crop of proposed legislation would, among other things, inflate employer data reporting requirements and further expand the scope of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”). Several of these recently introduced bills already have passed
Pablo Neruda once said “you can cut all the flowers but you cannot keep spring from coming.” Likewise, California businesses’ protests against oppressive employment legislation don’t seem to stem the tide of the Legislature’s latest batch of anti-employer bills.
The California Chamber of Commerce has just identified a host of recently introduced “Job Killer” Bills pending before the California Legislature. This year’s list includes
Aleman v. AirTouch Cellular, 202 Cal. App. 4th 117 (2011)
Daniel Krofta and Mary Katz filed this putative class action against their employer, alleging reporting time pay violations and seeking additional compensation for working split shifts. Krofta sought reporting time pay for days he attended meetings at work even though he was furnished work (and was paid) for at least half of the scheduled
Price v. Starbucks Corp., 192 Cal. App. 4th 1136 (2011)
Drake Price worked as an entry-level Starbucks barista for approximately 13 shifts before he was fired. Following his termination, he sued Starbucks on behalf of himself and a putative class of employees seeking to recover unpaid wages, penalties and damages for Starbucks’ alleged failure to timely pay him wages upon termination, failure to pay
The Vietnam Era Veterans’ Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974 (“VEVRAA”) creates a variety of affirmative action obligations for employers with federal government contracts. The Act was amended in 2002 by the Jobs for Veterans Act (“JVA”). In May 2008, the Department of Labor finalized rules that implement changes to these obligations made by the JVA for employers with federal government contracts that are entered into or modified on or after December 1, 2003. Employers with federal contracts entered into before December 1, 2003 must continue to comply with VEVRAA’s pre-JVA requirements, and employers with contracts in both categories are required to comply with both the new and the old regulations.
Most of the affirmative action requirements set out in VEVRAA remain unchanged by the JVA. This Tip of the Month outlines several important requirements under VEVRAA, and highlights the key changes created by the JVA.
As of this writing, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has confirmed 109 cases of the H1N1 virus, commonly known as swine flu, in the United States. The World Health Organization has confirmed 331 cases of swine flu worldwide and has raised the pandemic threat level to Phase 5 on its six-step scale (Phase 5 designation essentially means that infections from the outbreak that originated in Mexico have been jumping from person to person with relative ease). This Client Alert outlines a few of the myriad legal issues that employers may face with regard to swine flu. As every situation is different, employers are strongly encouraged to seek the advice of counsel with respect to any questions related to these issues. We are, of course, available to provide a more detailed analysis as to any of the matters discussed below or to advise on any other questions that you may have on pandemic flu planning and its implications for the workplace.