Employment Archives - Page 8 of 103 - EMPLOYEE BENEFITS BLOG

Seattle Payroll Expense Tax Upheld by State Appellate Court

by Troy Van Dongen | Jul 26, 2022 | Employee Benefits, Employment, Executive Compensation, Labor

Last month, the Washington Court of Appeals affirmed a lower court’s decision to dismiss a challenge to the recently enacted payroll expense tax in Seattle, WA. Seattle Metro. Chamber of Commerce v. City of Seattle, No. 82830-4-I, 2022 WL 2206828 (Wash. Ct. App. June 21, 2022).

The tax, which went into effect on January 1, 2021, applies to entities “engaging in business within Seattle” and is measured using the business’s “payroll expense” (defined as “compensation paid in Seattle to employees,” including wages, commissions, salaries, stock, grants, gifts, bonuses and stipends). The tax only applies to businesses with a payroll expense of more than $7 million in the prior calendar year, and compensation is considered “paid in Seattle” if the employee works more than 50% of the time in the city.

Read more here.

Supreme Court: An Employee’s Individual PAGA Claim Must Be Adjudicated in Arbitration

by Marjorie C. Soto Garcia and McDermott Will & Emery | Jul 21, 2022 | Employment

On June 15, 2022, the Supreme Court of the United States finally issued its long-awaited decision in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana. The Court partially overturned Iskanian v. CLS Transportation Los Angeles, LLC (Iskanian), determining that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) preempts the aspect of Iskanian’s holding that precludes the division of Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (PAGA) actions into individual and non-individual claims through an agreement to arbitrate. Meaning, if an employee subject to a valid arbitration agreement brings a PAGA claim, then the employee’s individual PAGA claim must be adjudicated in arbitration. (The individual aspect of the PAGA claim refers to violations of the Labor Code actually suffered by the plaintiff, whereas the non-individual “representative” aspect of the PAGA claim refers to the violations the plaintiff has alleged on behalf of other employees.)

Read more here.

New Chicago Ordinance on Sexual Harassment Takes Effect

by Brian Mead and Dawn Peacock | Jul 11, 2022 | Employment

The new Chicago Ordinance on sexual harassment, effective July 1, 2022, requires that an employer maintaining a business facility within the geographic boundaries of Chicago must have a written policy—including a conspicuously displayed notice poster in English and Spanish—documenting the prohibition of sexual harassment.

Read more here.

California Supreme Court Clarifies Whether Missed-Break Premiums Are ‘Wages’ That Trigger Derivative Penalties

by Chris Braham, Yesenia M. Gallegos and Paulina Chau | Jun 29, 2022 | Employment, Labor

On May 23, 2022, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in Naranjo v. Spectrum Sec. Servs. Inc. (Naranjo), holding that meal and rest break premiums (also known as extra pay or premium pay) constitute “wages” that: (1) must be accurately reported on employee wage statements pursuant to Labor Code section 226 and (2) must be timely paid to employees to avoid waiting time penalties pursuant to Labor Code section 203. The Court explained that “although the extra pay is designed to compensate for the unlawful deprivation of a guaranteed break, it also compensates for the work the employee performed during the break period.” Thus, employees may be entitled to wage statement penalties and waiting time penalties where the employee worked through their break.

Read more here.

New Jersey High Court Upholds Jersey City Payroll Tax

by Kathleen Quinn | Jun 21, 2022 | Employment

The New Jersey Supreme Court upheld two decisions by lower state courts in May to dismiss litigation challenging Jersey City’s ordinance that taxes city employers’ payroll but exempts residents. The supreme court also agreed with the state appellate division’s decision to remand for discovery one provision of the ordinance regarding the tax treatment of supervisors. Justice Barry T. Albin dissented in part.

In a recent Tax Notes article, McDermott Partner Kathleen Quinn agreed with Albin’s dissent.

Access the article.

German Tax Aspects of Cross-Border Remote Working

by Gero Burwitz and Isabella Denninger | Jun 8, 2022 | Benefit Controversies, Employee Benefits, Employment, Labor

As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, remote working became a necessity. Despite the easing lockdowns, the trend is likely to stay, particularly with “workstations” being actively promoted by the travel industry; however, there are considerable tax consequences for international employers. In this International News article, McDermott’s Gero Burwitz and Isabella Denninger discuss the complexity of this new working order and how international businesses can navigate it.

Access the article (pg. 11).

Employers Explore Abortion Coverage Continuation

by Sarah Raaii and McDermott Will & Emery | Jun 1, 2022 | Benefit Controversies, Employee Benefits, Employment, Executive Compensation, Health and Welfare Plans

While the United States awaits the Supreme Court’s ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson, which may overturn Roe v. Wade and eliminate the federal standard for abortion access, some states are considering setting their own standards that would ban or protect the medical procedure. This state-by-state rulemaking will cause some difficulty for employer plans, and employers are increasingly exploring ways to continue providing abortion coverage.

Read more here.

New York City’s Wage Transparency Law to Take Effect November 1, 2022

by Lindsay Ditlow, Mark Meredith, Abigail M. Kagan and McDermott Will & Emery | May 31, 2022 | Employee Benefits, Employment, Executive Compensation, Labor

On January 15, 2022, the New York City Council enacted Local Law 32 of 2022 (Wage Transparency Law or Law) to amend the New York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRL) to require that most employers include compensation data in their job advertisements. The Law was supposed to take effect on May 15, 2022, however, it faced criticism over a number of ambiguities, including undefined penalties. In response, on April 28, 2022, the New York City Council passed an amendment to the Wage Transparency Law. Among the biggest changes is that employers now have until November 1, 2022—more than six months—to ensure compliance with the Law’s requirements. If Mayor Eric Adams signs the Law, which he is expected to do, New York City will become the second jurisdiction in the country (the first being Colorado) to require employers to include minimum and maximum potential salary amounts for open positions in job postings.

Read more here.

OSHA Announces Plan to ‘Expand Its Presence’ in Certain Healthcare Facilities Treating COVID-19 Patients

by Abigail M. Kagan and Lindsay Ditlow | May 26, 2022 | Employee Benefits, Employment, Health and Welfare Plans, Labor

Between March 9, 2022, and June 9, 2022, the US Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) will “expand its presence” in hospitals and skilled nursing facilities that treat COVID-19 patients and that were previously cited or issued Hazard Alert Letters for alleged COVID-19 violations. OSHA’s stated purpose is to “target[] high-hazard healthcare facilities” to “verify and assess . . . compliance actions taken” by employers to rectify prior allegations related to COVID-19 safety violations. The initiative is focusing on employers’ “readiness to address any ongoing or future COVID-19 surges.”

Read more here.

California Updates COVID-19 Cal/OSHA ETS

by Michelle S. Strowhiro and Ludia Kwon | May 10, 2022 | Employee Benefits, Employment, Health and Welfare Plans, Labor

On April 21, 2022, the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health’s (Cal/OSHA) Standards Board approved the Third Readoption of the state’s COVID-19 Prevention Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS). Per Governor Gavin Newsom’s Executive Order N-23-21, the Third Readoption will remain in effect for no longer than December 31, 2022. The Third Readoption makes some additional material changes and clarifications, including acceptable return-to-work criteria, elimination of certain cleaning and social distancing requirements, and creation of a “returned case” category of workers recovered from COVID-19. Employers in California should update their COVID-19 ETS policies to ensure continued compliance with Cal/OSHA’s changes in the Third Readoption.

Read about the Third Readopted ETS here.

BLOG EDITORS

STAY CONNECTED

TOPICS

ARCHIVES

RECENT POSTS