MICHAEL SULLIVAN & ASSOCIATES BLOG

Your Resource for the Latest Legal News, Combined with Insights and Recommendations from Our Attorneys

Posts about Employment (2):

Cal/OSHA COVID-19 Non-Emergency Standards

Cal/OSHA COVID-19 Non-Emergency Standards

On February 3, 2023, Cal/OSHA’s COVID-19 Non-Emergency Standards was approved and became effective. The Non-Emergency Standards will remain in effect until February 3, 2025, and can be found at https://www.dir.ca.gov/oshsb/documents/COVID-19-Prevention-Non-Emergency-apprvdtxt-oal.pdf.

The Non-Emergency Standards relax several previously mandatory requirements and have modified some important definitions.

The following are changes employers need to be aware of and implement.

The Rhino 2023 Employment Law Update

The Rhino 2023 Employment Law Update

2023 marks the end of COVID-19 emergency regulations and the implementation of permanent COVID requirements. While several of the new 2023 laws relate in some way to COVID, businesses can expect a return to more non-COVID related requirements. Employers must implement wage transparency policies and implement an expansion of CFRA and sick leave policies by expanding the definition of family member to include a non-blood related individual. To avoid retaliation claims, employers must be aware of additional protected activities included those related to reproduction and fertility and employees’ right to leave the workplace during natural disasters and emergency conditions. Finally, bereavement leave has been expanded and, for larger employers, new privacy requirements must be implemented.

CAL/OSHA and CDPH Release Guidance for Monkey Pox

CAL/OSHA and CDPH Release Guidance for Monkey Pox

Cal/OSHA Guidance Applicable to Employers Subject to the ATD

As monkeypox (MPX) continues to be an issue throughout California, Cal/OSHA issued guidance to assist in protecting employees. This guidance applies only to workplaces covered by the aerosol transmissible diseases (ATD) standard so, for now, employers not subject to the ATD are not required to follow these recommendations. See the guidance here.

COVID AB 685 Employee Notice Requirements Updated & Extended to 2024

COVID AB 685 Employee Notice Requirements Updated & Extended to 2024

On September 29, 2022, California’s Governor signed Assembly Bill (AB) 2693, which amends and extends the COVID-19 workplace notice requirements stipulated in AB 685 until January 1, 2024. AB 2693 can be found here.

The existing law, AB 685, was enacted in 2020 and requires employers to provide written notice to employees who may have been exposed to COVID-19 in the workplace. The notice must be provided to all employees at the worksite within one business day and must include information regarding benefits available to employees, the company’s disinfection and safety plan, and a statement of anti-discrimination and anti-retaliation. For a full description of AB 685 see the CAL/OSHA Imposes New Notice and Reporting Obligations for COVID-19 Workplace Exposure update on Michael Sullivan & Associates' free eBook, Navigating COVID-19: a Legal Guide for Employers. Originally, this notification requirement was set to expire on January 1, 2023. AB 2693 extends this reporting requirement to January 1, 2024, and gives employers another option for complying with the notification requirements.

San Francisco Adopts Public Health Emergency Leave Ordinance

San Francisco Adopts Public Health Emergency Leave Ordinance

San Francisco voters passed Proposition G, a new public health emergency leave ordinance (PHELO) which takes effect on October 1, 2022. A copy of the proposition can be found here.

Leave is available only during a public health emergency, as defined by law. The public health emergency can be one declared by the federal or state government or declared locally by the City of San Francisco.

COVID-19 Supplemental Paid Sick Leave Extended Through December 31, 2022

COVID-19 Supplemental Paid Sick Leave Extended Through December 31, 2022

On September 29, 2022, Governor Gavin Newsom signed Assembly Bill (AB) 152, extending the obligation of employers with 26 or more employees to provide COVID-19 supplemental paid sick leave (SPSL) through December 31, 2022. The text of AB 152 can be found here: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB152.

Importantly, the bill doesn’t require employers to provide any additional leave. When originally enacted, SPSL required covered employers to provide paid COVID-related leave through September 30, 2022. The extension of SPSL does not require employers to provide new or additional leave. Instead, the up to 80 hours of SPSL that employees could have used between January 1, 2022 and September 30, 2022 (the original expiration date) must continue to be available through December 31, 2022, and possibly slightly beyond 2022 if an employee begins a covered absence at the end of 2022 that continues, uninterrupted, into 2023.

MS&A Employment Department Expands OSHA Compliance & Defense Practice

MS&A Employment Department Expands OSHA Compliance & Defense Practice

When the COVID-19 Pandemic brought new attention to occupational health and safety, Michael Sullivan and Associates became the go-to resource for clients and all California employers. Through countless free webinars and the acclaimed live e-book, Navigating COVID-19: A Legal Guide for California Employers, we guided employers through the ever-changing emergency mandates and the onslaught of new legislation.

SCOTUS Rules Arbitration Agreements Can Waive PAGA Claims

SCOTUS Rules Arbitration Agreements Can Waive PAGA Claims

In a highly-anticipated opinion released yesterday, Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that arbitration agreements between employers and employees can both send an employee’s claims under the Private Attorneys General Act, or PAGA, to binding private arbitration and prevent the employee from litigating Labor Code violations allegedly suffered by other employees. The immediate effect is a win for California employers with properly drafted arbitration agreements, but the opinion may signal the start of a new phase in the long-running arbitration wars rather than the decisive victory some employers hoped for.