Employers Must Post Job-Related Injuries Summary by Feb. 1

The CalChamber is reminding employers that they must post a summary of job-related injuries and illnesses from 2011 at their place of business by February 1.

The California Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) requires employers to display the Cal/OSHA Log 300 Summary of Work-Related Injuries and Illnesses (Form 300A) from February 1 to April 30 for employee review.

Companies that had 10 or fewer employees at all times during the last calendar year do not need to keep Cal/OSHA injury and illness records. Employers with 11 or more employees, except those covered in the California low-hazard establishments in the retail, service, finance and real estate sectors, must display the totals from the Form 300A wherever employee notices are usually posted.

If there is more than one business establishment, a separate summary must be posted in each physical location that is expected to be in operation for one year or longer.

More information on Log 300 filing and posting requirements is available on HRCalifornia. Not sure if these requirements apply to you? Check out this free Log 300 wizard from HRCalifornia's Forms & Tools section to find out.

Please visit CalChamber's website for complete details on the Form 300 and Form 300A.

CalChamber

Grocery Store Workers Protected

On Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected an appeal by California grocery store owners, who challenged the authority of cities to enact ordinances that protect workers from being immediately fired when a grocery store changes ownership.

Last summer, HR Watchdog blogged on the California Supreme Court’s decision to uphold a Los Angeles ordinance that forbids new owners of large grocery stores from laying off non-managerial employees for 90 days after the new ownership takes over.

After the California Supreme Court decision, the California Grocers Association (CGA) appealed to the nation’s high court to review the case. The CGA argued, in part, that the National Labor Relations Act pre-empts cities from enacting these ordinances. The CGA also argued that the ordinance violates owners' negotiating rights by forcing them take on workers that they did not choose and grant benefits and terms of employment that the employer did not agree to. 

The U.S. Supreme Court rejected the plea for review. This was the final avenue for appeal, and grocery store owners in Los Angeles must follow the ordinance.

The Los Angeles ordinance requires:

• The prior owner to prepare a list of non-managerial employees with at least six months employment.
• The new owner to hire from that list during the 90-day transition period.
  The new owner to only discharge the hired employees “for cause” during the transition period.
• The new owner to prepare a written evaluation of each employee’s performance at the end of the transition period.  
• The new owner to consider offering continued employment if the employee’s performance is satisfactory.

The ordinance does provide that if the workforce is unionized, the union and the employer can agree on alternative hiring arrangements.

Similar ordinances for grocery workers and other fields of employment, such as hotel workers, are in effect in other California cities.

Gail Cecchettini Whaley, CalChamber Employment Law Editor/Staff Counsel

For more information regarding the rights of workers displaced by layoffs, subscribe to HRCalifornia.com. Not a CalChamber member? Sign up for a 15-day Free Trial.

More Social Media Guidance From the NLRB

In 2011, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) increased its oversight activity relating to employer disciplinary actions for social media postings made by employees. HR Watchdog blogged frequently in 2011 on the NLRB’s activity in this area. 

Yesterday, the NLRB’s General Counsel issued its second report describing 14 social media cases reviewed by its office. The NLRB’s first report on 14 other social media cases was released in August, 2011. 

The purpose of this second report, as stated by the NLRB, is to provide further guidance to labor and employment law practitioners and HR professionals — many of whom grapple with how to handle employees who use social media to air workplace complaints or simply bad-mouth the company. 

Seven of these 14 cases involve questions about an employer’s social media policies. Five of the social media policies were found to be overly broad and unlawful. 

The problem occurs when a social media is written so broadly that it prohibits employees from discussing wages or working conditions. Employees, in both union and nonunion workplaces, have the right under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) to engage in concerted activities, including discussing working conditions, pay or other work-related issues.

If those discussions occur using social media accounts (such as an employee’s Facebook or Twitter account), the discussions may be protected under the NLRA.

The NLRB also stated that it intends to develop a practice of tracking all social media cases and developing a consistent approach. The Acting General counsel asked all regional offices to send cases which they believe to be meritorious to the NLRB’s Division of Advice in Washington, D.C.

The NLRB noted that its report represents its “interpretation” of the NLRA as it applies to social media communications and that some of these decisions are currently pending before the Board. The Board’s eventual determinations in those pending cases will provide further guidance as the law develops.

Gail Cecchettini Whaley, CalChamber Employment Law Editor/Staff Counsel

CalChamber can help. Our Employee Handbook Software includes a social media policy that complies with federal and state laws. Sign up for our Technology in the Workplace webinar on February 16, 2012, during which our legal experts will discuss social media policies in the workplace. 

Labor Commissioner Posts Updated FAQ on New Wage Notice

As CalChamber members know, a new state law that took effect January 1, 2012, requires employers to provide nonexempt employees with a notice at the time of hire containing specified wage information.

Employers have had many questions regarding putting the new notice into practice and how to comply with the law. Employers sought guidance on several issues, including:

• What should an employer do if the employee has multiple hourly pay rates or piece rates?
• Does the rate of pay required on the notice include other compensation for work performed?
• When does a “hire” occur for purposes of providing the required notice?

Today, the Labor Commissioner attempted to answer some of these inquires and issued an updated “Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Wage Theft Protection Act of 2011 -- Notice to Employees.”

As previously discussed on HR Watchdog, the new mandatory notice contains specific wage information, including:

• The rate of pay and the basis of the employee’s pay, whether hourly, salary, piece commission or otherwise, including any overtime rate
• Allowances, if any, claimed as part of the minimum wage, including meal and lodging allowances
• The regular pay day designated by the employer as required under the Labor Code
• The name of the employer, including any “doing business as” names
• The physical address of the employer’s main office or principal place of business and any mailing address, if different
•  The telephone number of the employer
• The name, address and telephone number of the employer’s workers’ compensation carrier

The Labor Commissioner prepared the form for employers to use, and this form contains all required information plus other information the Labor Commissioner deems “material and necessary.” The new notice is also available for download from HRCalifornia.

Keep checking HRCalifornia for more details on the new FAQs from the Labor Commissioner. CalChamber members will also get more information in the HRCalifornia Extra e-newsletter.

Not a CalChamber member? Sign up for a 15-day Free Trial. Or, subscribe to HRCalifornia Extra.

Gail Cecchettini Whaley, CalChamber Employment Law Editor/Staff Counsel

State Supreme Court Orders Review of Decision on Rounding Time Card Entries

At the request of the California Chamber of Commerce, the California Supreme Court ordered a review of a trial court decision to clarify whether rounding employees’ time card entries is legal.  

Previously, CalChamber urged the 4th District Court of Appeal to grant a petition by See’s Candy Shops, Inc. to review a San Diego County Superior Court decision that the practice of rounding employee time entries to the nearest six minutes violates California law.

Employers have long relied on the position of the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) and state Division of Labor Standards Enforcement that rounding is a lawful practice, the CalChamber said in its October letter to the 4th District Court of Appeal, and that approval is reflected in DOL regulations and the California Labor Commissioner’s enforcement policy, which follows the DOL regulations.

The issue of rounding time card entries is a matter of widespread concern to California employers, and the CalChamber regularly receives inquiries from its members concerning the rounding of time card entries. 

Some class action lawsuits already have been filed in California by plaintiffs alleging that rounding is illegal and seeking damages and penalties under the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA). Many employers will feel they have no choice but to stop their practice of rounding time to avoid the risk of class litigation.

After extensive research, the CalChamber concluded that the California Labor Code does not prohibit rounding and no California appellate decision has held that rounding is illegal. The CalChamber believes it would be best for this issue to be resolved now so California businesses will have certainty regarding this important timekeeping issue.

Please visit CalChamber.com for the full story.

Erika Frank, CalChamber Vice President and General Counsel

We Know It’s Cold Outside But …

Cal/OSHA just announced citations against two California farm labor contractors. The agency cited the contractors for cases of heat illness affecting two employees this past summer — one employee died and the other employee was a minor.

Cal/OSHA revised its heat illness standards in the fall of 2010. This past summer was the first time that employers with outdoor worksites needed to put those standards into action. The new regulations require:

• Employers to provide all employees with training on the risks and prevention of heat illness, including how to recognize symptoms and how to respond when they appear.
• Additional training to be provided to supervisors.
• High heat procedures for dealing with temperatures of 95 degrees or above.

In the first case, a 47-year-old male collapsed in a cantaloupe field and later died after being airlifted to a nearby hospital. Prior to his collapse, the employee was packaging cantaloupes, loading 40-pound boxes on a trailer and driving a tractor in 102-degree heat and high humidity.

A Cal/OSHA investigation revealed that the employer did not provide employees or supervisors the required training on how to identify and treat symptoms of heat illness. According to the investigation, the employer also failed to follow its own Heat Illness Prevention Program — including having emergency medical procedures in place in case of severe heat illness.

The citations included willful, serious and general violations and penalties amounting to more than $74,000. Cal/OSHA issues a willful violation when the investigation reveals that the employer is aware of a hazardous condition and makes no reasonable effort to eliminate the hazard.

The second case involved a 16-year-old farm worker who was picking bell peppers with his guardians in a field when he began suffering heat illness symptoms. The temperature in the field reached 105 degrees that evening when the crew began work. The supervisor noted the worker’s symptoms but did not seek medical assistance for the worker. The worker later recovered.

Cal/OSHA found that the employer did not provide adequate water, shade, rest breaks or first aid kits at the worksite. The employer also did not provide the required training to employees or supervisors. Further, the employer lacked procedures to protect employees in high heat conditions and procedures to summon emergency assistance, if needed.

The employer received six serious violations and one general violation, with a total penalty of more than $61,000. The case was also referred to the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, which also issued citations against the employer for two child labor violations — one for failing to maintain a permit, and one for putting the minor to work outside the permitted work hours for a minor.

CalChamber members can get more information on heat illness prevention, including a form to develop a personalized plan, from HRCalifornia.com. Not a CalChamber member? Sign up for a 15-day Free Trial.

Gail Cecchettini Whaley, CalChamber Employment Law Editor/Staff Counsel

 

CalChamber's Employment Law Experts Coming to a City Near You

Today, we're in Long Beach preparing for tomorrow's HR 201: California Labor Law Update seminar. We still have a few spaces available for the seminar.

What better way to spend Friday the 13th than learning how to avoid trouble because of changes in state and federal law?

We hope to see some of you in Southern California this week. Northern California-based HR professionals, we'll see you next week in the Bay Area, where we've got a full seminar schedule:

• HR 201: California Labor Law Update
• HR 101: Intro to HR Administration
• FMLA/CFRA: Beyond the Basics

Erika Frank and Susan Kemp

HR 201 Seminar Report

Hello from Costa Mesa.

We were pleased to see great attendance at our HR 201: California Labor Law Update Seminar. Attendees also asked many excellent questions about how new laws will impact the workplace, such as:

• Do employees with a company credit card fall within the exemption to AB 22 so that employers could perform a credit check on those employees?
• Does the new wage and employment notice (AB 469) have to be issued to current employees who receive a pay increase?

We hope to see many of you at our upcoming HR 101, HR 201 and FMLA/CFRA seminars so we can answer your employment questions.  

Erika Frank and Susan Kemp

 

Employers Work with CalVet to Help Veteran Employees

California employers are working with the California Department of Veterans Affairs (CalVet) to help employees who are veterans take advantage of the state and federal benefits they have earned through military service.

CalVet’s growing list of employer partners includes Aerojet, Bechtel Corporation, Cintas Corporation, Comcast, Health Net Federal Services, HP, Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company, Merck, Oracle, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Republic Services, Southwest Airlines, State Farm, TASC Inc., United Airlines, United Rentals, Verizon, Warner Bros. Entertainment, and many others in the defense, energy, technology, telecommunications, transportation, finance, health care, pharmaceutical, media, entertainment and retail industries.

Less than 15 percent of eligible California veterans take advantage of their compensation and pension benefits and only 36 percent use their health benefits, according to CalVet.

Educating Employees

With CalVet’s help, employers’ staffs are educating employees about CalVet and about other programs and services available to veterans and their families. CalVet then contacts veterans who request assistance, assesses the veterans’ needs and helps get them connected to benefits, including:

• Compensation and pension payments for a service-connected disability
• Education benefits, including free college tuition for dependents
• Health benefits, including free assistive devices, such as eye glasses and hearing aids
• Housing
• Farm and home loans
• Survivor benefits
• And many others

Besides providing information and resources, CalVet can help veterans through the often complicated and frustrating benefit application processes.

Passing Along Information

Getting the word out is one of CalVet’s biggest challenges because the agency has no marketing or media budget. CalVet turns to employer partnerships, relying on partners to expand its outreach efforts.CalVet said employers can help by placing a CalVet article in an employee newsletter or sending CalVet information to Twitter and Facebook followers and friends, and encouraging them to share the information with others.

To help employer partners connect with veteran job seekers, CalVet placed employer careers/jobs page links on the “Employment” page of the CalVet website. If pending state and federal legislation passes, employers that hire veterans may be entitled to special tax breaks or other incentives.

To find out how your organization can become an employer partner and support CalVet’s efforts to reach and assist California veterans, contact Carolyn Ballou at (916) 653-1355 or carolyn.ballou@calvet.ca.gov. 

CalChamber

Be Ready: Labor Enforcement Task Force Launched

The California Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) announced the launch of a new task force to “combat the underground economy.”

The Labor Enforcement Task Force (LETF) will be made up of personnel from the Department of Industrial Relations, the Employment Development Department, the Contractor’s State License Board, the Board of Equalization and the Bureau of Automotive Repair. 

The LETF was created to crack down on businesses that do not follow the state’s labor laws — hiring employees off the books and paying them under the table.

According to DIR, businesses that operate underground may violate many laws, including not paying income taxes, unemployment insurance or disability insurance; not carrying workers’ compensation coverage; not paying proper wages; and not registering for required licenses and permits.  

“These underground operations subsequently pay lower overhead costs which give them an unfair competitive advantage over legitimate, law-abiding businesses,” the DIR said in a statement.

The DIR said the LETF was created to

• Ensure workers receive proper payment of wages and are provided a safe work environment
• Ensure California receives all employment taxes, fees and penalties due from employers
• Eliminate unfair business competition by leveling the playing field

The LETF will also be working with the state Attorney General’s office, local district attorneys’ offices and the Department of Insurance on enforcement efforts.

The Department of Insurance said it will work with the LETF to focus on those employers who underreport payroll or misclassify employees to obtain a lower rate for workers’ compensation coverage, thus committing premium fraud.

Gail Cecchettini Whaley, CalChamber Employment Law Editor/Staff Counsel

Southern California Seminars Begin Monday, Jan. 9

Happy New Year! We are headed to Costa Mesa, Anaheim and Long Beach for a week of seminars:

• We have lots to discuss in our HR 201: California Labor Law Update seminar in Anaheim and Long Beach because 2011 was a busy year for our courts and the Legislature.  
• In Costa Mesa and Long Beach, we will be presenting our HR 101: Intro to HR Administration seminar. This daylong seminar is for those who are new to HR or who need a refresher. Attendees will have ample time to get their questions answered during the presentation. 
• For those of you who have family and medical leave questions, we will be presenting our FMLA/CFRA: Beyond the Basics seminar in Costa Mesa.  

We look forward to seeing you at one of our seminars next week. For a complete list of seminars, dates and locations, visit the CalChamber store's Training page.

To help get you ready for our seminars, we prepared a summary of new employment laws for 2012. Download CalChamber’s white paper, “An Overview of New 2012 Laws Affecting California Employers,” for detailed information on how each of these new California laws could affect your business. Unless specified, all new legislation takes effect January 1, 2012.

 Erika Frank and Susan Kemp

VETS Reporting Delayed Until January 2012

The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) announced that it has delayed the filing deadline for Vets-100/Vets-100A reporting forms for the 2011 cycle to January 15, 2012. The filing deadline was set for today.

“All paper reports and electronic files received at the Service Desk by January 15th will be included as part of the 2011 filing cycle and will not be considered late,” the DOL announced in a statement.

Federal contractors use the VETS-100/VETS-100A reporting forms to detail the number of protected veteran employees and new hires in their workforce. Regulations require contractors to submit this form by September 30 of each year. Technical issues have delayed the reporting requirement this year.

Please visit the VETS website for more information on VETS-100/VETS-100A  rules and regulations, including a federal contractor fact sheet.

Gail Cecchettini Whaley, CalChamber Employment Law Editor/Staff Counsel

Get Ready For New Compliance Requirements

CalChamber members can visit this specially created page to learn what they need to know about new employment laws, court cases and regulations that will take effect in 2012.

Some of these new requirements will affect your company's day-to-day operations.

Not a CalChamber member? Check out our Cases and News page to see how we keep members informed, and try HRCalifornia free for 15 days.