Arizona recently expanded provisions of the Arizona Civil Rights Act (ACRA) to cover pregnancy and pregnancy-related conditions. Additionally, following a national trend in response to perceived state and federal inaction, cities in Arizona on their own passed new ordinances that expands protected categories and coverage.

ACRA Expansion

As the current economic crisis escalates and governmental plans to provide billions of dollars to intervene in the capital markets take shape, financial institutions and other businesses are being forced to restructure their operations through merger, acquisition or reductions in force. The tough economic climate will also, no doubt, lead companies to reassess their benefit plans and executive compensation packages. However, employers must evaluate their own responses to these developments to ensure that they are complying with legal requirements and proceeding cautiously.

As many employers are on the way to normalizing their business practices and re-engaging their employees, they should not overlook the many potential pitfalls in the administration of their retirement, health and welfare plans and their executive compensation arrangements. The risks of missteps are high, and include loss of tax-qualification of retirement plans, penalty taxes in connection with the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) employer mandate rules, other IRS penalties, employee lawsuits and Department of Labor enforcement actions.

Financial services firms regulated in the UK by both the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) have long caused confusion, particularly in international financial services groups, with their complex regulatory pay structures and infamous bonus cap.

Johane Severin discusses the growing practice of “stay-or-pay” contracts, which some argue force workers to pay if they resign ahead of a stipulated date.

International Employment Lawyer

View (Subscription required.)

The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) published its new immigration-related fines/penalties, effective January 15, 2024. Immigration-related violations before the DOL involve these visas: H-1B, H-2A, and H-2B. These increases are pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 2015. Since that time, penalties have been adjusted yearly based on the rate of inflation.

Below are the offenses, including regulation citations, with the old and new penalties:

On January 30, 2024, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced an increase to its filing fees across the board. The last such increase was in 2016. This change will be effective April 1, 2024. In some cases, increases are minor, but several are substantive.

Meredith Shoop talks about the Affirmative Action Program Verification Interface where covered federal contractors can upload their affirmative action plans for review.

Government Executive

View

On March 31, 2022, the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) issued a new Directive 2022-02.  Its stated purpose is to provide “transparency on OFCCP’s compliance evaluation policies and expectations for contractors”—but upon review, it appears to be a retreat from the standards of transparency, certainty, and efficiency that guided OFCCP from 2017 through 2020.  The new directive radically alters OFCCP’s approach toward compliance reviews and removes guardrails that had been put in place t

On August 18, 2022, the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) issued a revised version of its Directive 2022-01 - Advancing Pay Equity Through Compensation Analysis, which was originally issued on March 15, 2022.

On August 24, 2023, the Office of Management and Budget approved a request from the U.S. Department of Labor’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) to revise the “Itemized Listing” that OFCCP uses to collect information from federal contractors that are selected for supply or service audits. Among the changes that have been approved is a new requirement that audited contractors:

Littler Women's Leadership Initiative co-chair Margaret Parnell Hogan, interviews fellow Littler attorney Dionysia L. Johnson-Massie, about how respecting women in the workplace helps recruit and retain crucial talent, among other IE&D efforts.
  

In the wake of the Supreme Court’s Loper decision, Jamie Spataro says existing regulations and standards that went through extensive rulemaking are ripe for being challenged.

Business Insurance

View (Subscription required)

Dan Boatright discusses the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal’s decision to strike down the 80/20 labor rule and what that decision means for employers. 

Nation’s Restaurant News

View

Verónica M. Torres-Torres explains new guidance on exemptions for remote workers and airline staff in Puerto Rico.

News is My Business

View

Erin Webber explains how a remote environment requires more leadership responsibility, skills and choices.

The American Lawyer

View Article (Subscription required.) 

Largely overshadowed by the rise in COVID-19 deaths and the January 6, 2021, siege on the Capitol, the Criminal Antitrust Anti-Retaliation Act of 2019 (“the Act”) became law on December 23, 2020. See 15 U.S.C. § 7a-3. The Act, which Senator Chuck Grassley sponsored, prohibits employers from retaliating against individuals who report criminal antitrust violations to their employer or the federal government, or who participate in a federal governmental criminal antitrust investigation or proceeding.  

Background

Joon Hwang advises employers to review and scope the terms of their restrictive covenants and confidentiality agreements to ensure they are well defined to meet their business interests.

Pit & Quarry

View 

Raoul Parekh and Natasha Adom write in support of updating laws to help give employers more freedom to create the real change that so many want and promote more diversity and equality in workplaces.

The Law Society Gazette

View

Miguel Arberas explains that those who lie about their training and training to get a job can be dismissed even if there is no damage. 

EL PAÍS

View

At the November 5, 2024 election, California voters will determine the fate of Proposition 32, which proposes to increase the state minimum wage and provide for automatic future adjustments tied to inflation.

On October 4, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services (Case No. 23-1039) to decide whether plaintiffs who are members of historically majority communities asserting “reverse discrimination” claims under Title VII must show there are “background circumstances” that support the inference that the defendant is the “unusual employer who discriminates against the majority.”

The “Background Circumstances” Requirement

The Wisconsin Fair Employment Act (WFEA) prohibits employers from discriminating against applicants and employees on the basis of their arrest and conviction records.¹  Generally, an employer cannot make decisions on the basis of an arrest or conviction record unless the crimes “substantially relate” to the circumstances of the job at issue.²  For many years, the state agencies responsible for enforcing this law—the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development (DWD) and the Labor and Industry Review Commission (LIRC)—have taken the view that crimes of domestic violen

Background check industry groups have mounted a full-court press to remedy the recent slowdown in criminal record searches in California state courts caused by last year’s court of appeal decision in All of Us or None v.

On April 4, 2022, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit joined the Ninth Circuit in holding that a plaintiff lacked Article III standing to prosecute her statutory claims under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) in federal court. The Eighth Circuit’s opinion in Schumacher v. SC Data Center, Inc. deepens the split between the circuit courts on standing and increases the chances that the U.S. Supreme Court eventually will have to weigh in on the issue again.

Background: Spokeo and Ramirez

The Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) is a federal law that governs employment-related background checks.  Most lawsuits asserting federal claims proceed in federal court.¹  The FCRA is atypical in that FCRA claims can proceed in either federal or state court.  A new opinion from a California court of appeal in Hebert v.

The City Council of Atlanta, Georgia recently passed an ordinance that amends its existing anti-discrimination law to include protection on the basis of “criminal history status” as well as “gender expression.”  The ordinance is effective immediately.

With regard to gender expression, the law simply amends existing law to include “gender expression” as an additional protected characteristic.

Rachel P. Kaercher, Wendy Buckingham and William J. Simmons examine a new ordinance passed by the Atlanta City Council that amends its existing anti-discrimination law to include protections on the basis of criminal history status and gender expression.

SHRM Online

View (Subscription required.)

Updated July 31, 2023: The Council’s Modifications to Employment Regulations Regarding Criminal History discussed in this Insight have just been approved by the Office of Administrative Law, and the modified regulations will go into effect on October 1, 2023. Key changes from the initial proposal include:

Rod M. Fliegel and Alice H. Wang discuss the Civil Rights Council of the California Civil Rights Department’s latest revisions to the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) regulations that govern employers' use and consideration of criminal history in employment decisions.

SHRM Online

View (Subscription required.)

Updated March 24, 2023: The CFPB has edited its updated Summary of Rights document to include the correct contact number. 

*  *  *

Alice Wang and Rod M. Fliegel say the Fair Chance Act of 2023, a California bill under consideration in the state senate, “would more or less upend the ordinary hiring process for just about every employer in California,” if passed.

HR Dive

View

Rod Fliegel discusses California’s proposed Fair Chance Act of 2023, which would further restrict how employers can use information about the criminal histories of job seekers and employees, and offers tips for complying with the current Fair Chance Act.

SHRM Online

View (Subscription required.)

For nearly a decade, Chicago has maintained a “ban-the-box” ordinance restricting employer’s use of criminal records in employment screening. This ordinance largely mirrored the requirements of Illinois’ state-wide Job Opportunities for Qualified Applicants Act (JOQAA), albeit with some important differences.

The California Civil Rights Council previously issued draft revisions to the Fair Employment and Housing Act’s regulations governing inquiries into and consideration of a job applicant’s criminal history in making hiring decisions.  On July 24, 2023, the Office of Administrative Law approved the Council’s proposed modifications to the regulations. 

Companies that hire employees and engage independent contractors in California should brace themselves for an even greater slowdown in background checks that include criminal record searches in Los Angeles County.¹ This will result from the drastic impact of the court of appeal’s 2021 opinion in All of Us or None v.

On March 14, 2024, the Massachusetts House of Representatives passed legislation that would add a new provision to the Massachusetts Consumer Protection law and would bar the use of true credit reports for employment purposes, i.e., for the purpose of evaluating an individual for employment, promotion, reassignment, or retention as an employee.  The legislation, entitled An Act Reducing Barriers to Employment Through Credit Discrimination (H.1434), is expected to be adopted by the Massachusetts Senate and promptly signed into law by Governor Maura Healy.  Once adopted, th

The Lehigh County Human Relations Ordinance was enacted February 26, 2024, establishing county-specific non-discrimination requirements for employment, housing, education, health care and public accommodations.  The ordinance also creates a Lehigh County Human Relations Commission charged with investigating and enforcing claims of discrimination.  The ordinance becomes effective June 1, 2024.

Expanded Protected Characteristics and Employer Coverage

The Prince George’s, Maryland County Council recently enacted Bill CB-019-2024, amending the county's Fair Criminal Record Screening Standards. Effective September 16, 2024, the ordinance—renamed “Access to Employment for Returning Citizens”—significantly restricts employers' ability to conduct criminal background checks on job applicants. Changes to the law include a smaller threshold for employer coverage, expanded limitations on employer inquiries into applicant criminal histories, and expanded protections for employees.

Employer Coverage Threshold

The federal Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has announced that certain employers can claim federal tax credits when employees use emergency paid leave to accompany an individual to obtain a COVID-19 vaccination and/or to care for an individual recovering from an injury, disability, illness, or condition related to the vaccine.

El 7 de enero de 2022, el Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía (INEGI) publicó los nuevos valores para la Unidad de Medida y Actualización (en adelante “UMA”) que entrará en vigor el 1 de febrero de 2022, de acuerdo con lo establecido en el Artículo 5 de la Ley para Determinar la Unidad de Medida y Actualización.

Los valores de la UMA para el 2022 serán los siguientes:

On January 7, 2022, Mexico’s National Institute of Statistics and Geography (INEGI by its acronym in Spanish) published the new values for the Updated Metric Unit (Unidad de Medida y Actualización or UMA) that will take effect on February 1, 2022, as provided by Article 5 of the Law to determine the value of the UMA. The UMA serves as the basis for calculating the payments, obligations, or penalties that are owed to the government, whether under federal or state law. Its updated value is published on an annual basis.

The values of the UMA for 2022 will be as follows: