Posts Tagged ‘employer best practices’
BRINKER’S NEW RULES FOR MEAL AND REST BREAKS
The Necessity of Management Training While the California Supreme Court’s Brinker decision (April 12, 2012) supplied vital and sensible guidelines that do not require employers to act as a “police” authority confirming workers take their meal and rest breaks, the law will still impose penalties on a business if its supervisors and managers, for lack […]
BRINKER EMPLOYEES MAY SKIP BREAKS
Yet, Greater Flexibility Requires Greater Documentation The recent California Supreme Court Brinker decision (April 12, 2012) on the standards for providing meal and rest breaks now permits greater flexibility on scheduling, including employer ability to provide workers the option to skip breaks from time-to-time. However, an employer should take care to institute and maintain written […]
EMPLOYEE COMMISSIONS
California Requires Written Agreements by End of 2012 California Labor Code 2751 is being revised to require employers to place commission pay arrangements in writing. Businesses have the next 12 months to prepare. Effective January 1, 2013, section 2751(a) will state: “Whenever an employer enters into a contract of employment with an employee for services […]
A CALIFORNIA EMPLOYER’S GUIDE TO NEW LAWS 2012: GENETICS INFORMATION DISCRIMINATION
Revisions to California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act On January 1, 2012, the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) will prohibit businesses from discriminating against applicants and employees based on genetic information. The new law will impose California standards tougher than the federal 2008Genetic Information Non-Discrimination Act (GINA). Both the federal and California law are aimed at curbing discrimination of qualified and performing employees due to […]
GENDER EQUALITY AND DISCRIMINATION IN THE WORKPLACE
Employment sex or gender discrimination arises from treating male and female employees with comparable skills and in comparable jobs differently. Personnel decisions must be made on the basis of skills and other job-related qualifications. Unless a person’s sex is a job requirement (e.g., locker room attendants in a sports club), choosing to hire, discipline, fire, […]
IMMIGRATION LAW REQUIREMENTS FOR EMPLOYERS
Federal law requires every employer hiring any individual in the United States to verify the prospect’s identity and employment authorization through completion of Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification. An employer must complete an I-9 form for every person hired, even if there’s just one employee in the business. It is improper for a company to […]
THE EQUAL PAY ACT
Equal Work = Equal Pay The 1963 federal Equal Pay Act (EPA) requires employers to pay men and women equally for performing the same, or essentially the same, work. While the law is worded neutrally (it is just as unlawful to underpay either gender), Congress enacted the EPA to remedy the long-standing pay discrimination against […]
WORKPLACE AGE DISCRIMINATION LAWS PROTECT “OLD PEOPLE” ONLY
How Old is Legally “Old”? While many might recognize that business cannot use “age” as a criterion for employment decisions, including hiring, promotion, discipline or termination, the federal and California protections actually only apply to persons “of a certain age.” Workers under 40, the relatively “young,” do not have such rights. Employees aged 40 or […]
NO PROTECTION FROM WORKERS’ COMPENSATION REQUIREMENTS
California Employers Must Carry On-the-Job Injury Insurance California businesses must carry workers’ compensation insurance for every employee, even just one. Group or personal health insurance is not a substitute. Workers’ compensation is oldest social insurance program in the U.S., adopted by most states in early part of the 20th century. The coverage is intended to […]
NATIONAL ORIGIN DISCRIMINATION
Best Practices for Fair and Equal Employment In our richly diverse society, it is perhaps no surprise that national origin workplace discrimination claims have been increasing steadily across the country since 2001. It is unlawful for business to make a significant employment decision – e.g. hiring, advancing, demoting, or firing – based on a worker’s […]