Employment Law Observer

In the spirit of the season, we are using our annual "12 days of the holidays" blog series to address new California laws and their impact on California employers. On this seventh day of the holidays, my labor and employment attorney gave to me: seven swans a-swimming and AB 1003.

On September 30, 2021, Florida’s hourly minimum wage rate increased from $8.56 to $10.00. For the next five years, the hourly minimum wage in Florida will increase by $1.00 each year until it reaches $15.00 per hour in 2026. This increase came as the result of Amendment 2, passed on November 3, 2020, by an overwhelming majority of Florida voters.

In the spirit of the season—and keeping some semblance of normal—we are using our annual "12 days of the holidays" blog series to address new California laws and their impact on California employers. On this fifth day of the holidays, my labor and employment attorney gave to me: five golden rings and AB 3075.

By definition, the hallmark of the fluctuating workweek (FWW) is that the hours fluctuate. Now, following another opinion letter from the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) on the topic, employers know that this does not mean fluctuating below 40 hours per week.

In a major victory for franchisors, a panel of the Ninth Circuit recently held that McDonald's Corporation cannot be liable as a joint employer for the wage and hour violations of its franchisees. Importantly, the court held that McDonald's involvement with its franchises and franchise workers is focused on maintaining brand standards and "does not represent control over wages, hours or working conditions." However, uncertainty remains over the liability of franchisors that impose more than just branding and marketing standards on its franchisees.

The United States Department of Labor (DOL) made official a new regulation increasing the minimum salary level that salaried employees must be paid to be exempt from overtime. As of January 1, 2020, if a salaried employee makes less than $684 per week—or $35,568 per year—the employee will be entitled to overtime for the hours worked beyond 40 hours in a week.

The Wage and Hour Division of the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) has announced proposed changes to the regular rate regulations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). According to the DOL, the proposed changes are focused on updating and clarifying the regular rate regulations, and intended to encourage employers to provide additional benefits to workers without inviting litigation.

The Department of Labor (DOL), Wage and Hour Division, recently issued its first set of opinion letters for 2019. One of the letters, FLSA2019-02, addresses whether employee time spent participating in an employer's optional volunteer program is compensable work time under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). As many employers today offer optional volunteer programs to their employees, this opinion letter is helpful for employers to determine whether employee time spent volunteering with such a program is compensable.

For nearly four years, proposed Department of Labor (DOL) rule changes that would expand the number of workers eligible for overtime wages have remained in limbo. The latest twist in this long-standing saga came last week, when the DOL published a new "Notice of Proposed Rule Making" (NPRM), which sets a new salary threshold for overtime pay at $679 per week ($35,308 per year). Under these proposed rules, any salaried employee earning less than that amount, will be entitled to overtime for the hours the employee works beyond forty (40) in a week.

In Nisei Farmers League vs. California Labor and Workforce Development Agency, California’s Fifth Appellate District confirmed the constitutional validity of Labor Code section 226.2, a recently enacted law providing that employees paid on a piece-rate basis must be paid at least minimum wage, and must be paid for rest and recovery periods and “other nonproductive time” separate from any piece-rate compensation. Under a piece-rate system, employees are not paid by the hour, but rather based on activities, task or units of production completed. For example, employees are paid by the number of widgets they produce. The goal of the statute was to make sure employers who pay under a piece-rate system also comply with all minimum wage law requirements that apply to hourly workers.

The federal Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division (WHD) provided updated guidance on its application of the “tip credit” rule for tipped employees who perform non-tip-generating tasks.

A District Court Judge in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania recently ruled that the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) preempted a plaintiff’s attempt to add state common law counts for breach of contract and unjust enrichment onto his statutory wage and hour claims. Formica v. US Environmental, Inc., (No. 18-459; July 11, 2018).  The plaintiff alleged FLSA, Pennsylvania Minimum Wage Act, and Pennsylvania Wage Payment and Collection Law claims. 

The United States Supreme Court recently handed the defense bar a useful tool in stemming the tide of class action lawsuits. In the area of employment law, claims for violations of federal wage and hour laws, violations of state and local regulations governing employees, and systemic workplace discrimination are prone to class action claims.

On July 1, 2018, multiple state and local authorities will increase the hourly minimum wage rate ever closer to the $15.00 per hour wage demanded by the Fight for $15 advocates. The following lists of minimum wage increases are not exhaustive and may not reflect increases within a certain working sector (for example, increase in minimum wages for tipped workers or hotel workers).Therefore, we encourage you to contact legal counsel for up-to-date information regarding your city, county or state.

In  AHMC  Healthcare,  Inc.  v.  Letona,  decided  earlier  this  week,  a  California  state  of  appeals  court  considered  an  employer's  use  of  a  time  clock  rounding  system  and  whether  it  violated  California  Labor  Law.  While  it  is  a  California  case,  it  rests  on  the  federal  regulation  governing  time  rounding  found  in  29  CFR  §  785.48  and  is  thus  an  instructive  case  for  all  employers  who  use  or  are  thinking  about  adopting  a  rounding  policy. 

The Family & Medical Leave Act ("FMLA") grants employees leave in certain enumerated situations. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals recently held it also allows the employee and employer to strike an agreement that the employee will perform certain duties and responsibilities during the leave and receive compensation for it without creating an actionable interference claim under the FMLA.

When former District of Columbia Police Chief Cathy Lanier stepped into her new role as security chief for the National Football League (“NFL”), she let it be known there was a “new sheriff in town,” a federal lawsuit alleges. About one year later, the NFL fired 9 security representatives accounting for approximately 1/3rd of the league’s staffing for the position and approximately 75% of the security representatives who were of the of age 60 or older. The security personnel promptly filed a federal suit in the Southern District of New York.

The Labor Department, Wage & Hour Division, issued an Opinion Letter earlier this week answering questions about the compensability of travel time for hourly technicians under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The technicians did not work at a fixed location or a fixed daily schedule. They worked 8 to 16 hours per day at various locations. Sometimes they stayed in hotels overnight or traveled out of town for training courses. The employer provided technicians company vehicles, which they could use for both work and personal purposes.

Use of one's last salary or salary history to determine compensation can be a proxy for sex discrimination. Once considered a legitimate "factor other than sex," some jurisdictions are banning the use of a job candidate's salary history to determine compensation as it has perpetuated pay inequities between the sexes. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is the highest-profile court to address, and ban, use of salary history in the employment setting in most (but not all) cases.

The California Supreme Court may soon provide health-care providers rare and much needed clarification concerning their wage and hour practices. It will do so in response to the Ninth Circuit’s request for guidance on the following wage and hour issues touching upon the meal and rest period rights of ambulance attendants: