Author: Medina McKelvey

An important decision came down from the California Supreme Court this week. The decision clarifies how employers should report meal and rest period premium payments. Failing to properly adhere to this new reporting standard may leave your business vulnerable to liability.   

As federal and state governments continue to loosen their requirements in the workplace for COVID-19, California has followed suit and made it easier for employers to comply with COVID-19 workplace standards.

The United States Supreme Court will soon hear a pivotal case impacting employers with non-exempt hourly employees. The case, Moriana v. Viking River Cruises, is set for oral argument on March 30, 2022, with a decision expected this summer.

California has reinstituted its paid COVID-19 supplemental sick leave, which requires employers with more than 25 employees to provide supplemental paid sick leave (SPSL) to employees out with COVID-19 or related issues, retroactive to January 1, 2022.

The stay on the Emergency Temporary Standards (“ETS”) was dissolved on Friday and the ETS is now reinstated. OSHA will not issue citations for noncompliance with any requirements of the ETS before January 10 and will not issue citations for noncompliance with the standard’s testing requirements before February 9, so long as an employer is exercising reasonable, good faith efforts to come into compliance with the standard.

To refresh your recollection, below is the original legislative update about the new ETS.

OSHA has issued an Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS) requiring all employers with at least 100 employees to ensure that their workers are vaccinated or submitting to weekly COVID testing. The ETS is effective November 5, 2021, and employees have until January 4, 2021, to be fully vaccinated or begin testing weekly. 

The enforceability of arbitration agreements is one of the most litigated and appealed issues in employment law.  And now the appellate courts are at it again. On September 15, 2021, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Chamber of Commerce v. Bonta, issued an important ruling on the enforceability of arbitration agreements. You might have heard about a law passed last year called AB 51, which prohibited California employers from forcing employees to sign arbitration agreements as a condition of employment. The bill even went so far as to make it a misdemeanor for employers to use mandatory arbitration agreements.

This guidance recommends stronger workplace COVID protocols, including increased masking for all employees regardless of vaccination status and encourages vaccination for all employees. It also recommends physical distancing and other COVID prevention and reporting methods most businesses already have in place. At this time, the OSHA recommendations are guidance only and are not mandatory.

In the latest COVID news, the CDC has reversed its position on mask mandates indoors for vaccinated individuals and is now recommending that everyone wear masks indoors, regardless of vaccination status.

Last week, the California Supreme Court issued a decision in Ferra v. Loews Hollywood Hotel addressing what rate needs to be paid for meal and rest period premium payments.