California Governor Jerry Brown signed a number of employment-related bills by the Oct. 15, 2017 deadline. These employment laws had been proposed during the California State Legislature’s 2017 session. Many of them promise to have significant impact on employees and employers when they take effect Jan. 1, 2018.
California will prohibit all employers, including state and federal governments, from requiring – or even asking about – an employee’s salary and benefit history. This prohibition includes request for salary history from applicants, employment agencies, or other agents.
Though an employee is permitted to volunteer the information, salary history is not allowed to be used as a factor in an employment offer or in determining an applicant’s salary. Employees also have the right to request and to receive a position’s pay scale.
Assembly Bill 168 is intended to stop gender-based inequities and to support the California Equal Pay Act, enacted in 2015 and amended in 2016 to include race and ethnicity.
Numerous states, cities and counties have implemented some version of “Ban the Box” law and/or “fair chance hiring” requirements. The purpose of these laws is to help people with conviction histories attain employment and to help reduce unemployment in communities that have a high number of people with conviction histories.
Assembly Bill 1008, the “Ban the Box” law, has a significant number of elements. With some exceptions, employers will not be allowed to consider arrests that did not result in a conviction. They also may not consider a referral or participation in a pre-trial or post-trial diversion program. There are exceptions for criminal justice positions and for jobs that require employers to conduct criminal background checks (such as jobs in which employees come in contact with vulnerable populations like children).
The “Ban the Box” law regulates how an employer handles:
Some cities – San Francisco and Los Angeles – have Fair Chance Ordinances that relate to employers and applicants’ criminal histories. These remain in effect in addition to the “Ban the Box” laws.
Assembly Bill 450 prohibits employers from allowing federal immigration agents from searching nonpublic areas of worksite without a court order. It also prohibits employers from permitting federal immigration agents to access or to review personnel records, including I-9 Employment Eligibility Verification forms without the proper legal orders.
The bill also prohibits employers from re-verifying an employee’s employment eligibility if federal law doesn’t require it.
There are many elements to this law, including how employers must give notice to employees if inspections are undertaken by federal immigration agents. Penalties for employers who don’t follow the provisions in the law range from $2,000 to $10,000 for each violation.
Employees who work in companies with 50+ people in a 75-mile radius have been eligible for parental leave benefits for some time under the Federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and the California Right Act (CFRLA).
Now, California Senate Bill 63, the “New Parent Leave Act,” provides up to 12-weeks of job-protected parental leave to parents with a new child (birth, adoption, or foster), for employees of companies with 20+ employees in a 75-mile radius. The new law does not apply to employers with 75+ employees who are covered under both FMLA and CFRLA.
Similar to the other laws, it only applies to employees who have worked (full-time, temporary, or part-time), at the company for 12 or more months and who have at least 1,250 hours (about 25 hours/per week), of work during the previous 12-month period.
The leave is unpaid, but employees can use vacation pay, sick pay, or accrued paid time off for their leave. The employer is not permitted to interfere in any way with an eligible employee taking the leave and must guarantee employment upon the individual’s return to the same job or a comparable job.
The bill requires the creation of a parental leave mediation program. In order to bring a civil lawsuit against an employer not fulfilling their obligations, an employer will have 60 days from receiving a right-to-sue notice to request mediation. If either party does not want mediation, or wants to quit mediation, they can send a letter to the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing either declining to participate or withdrawing from mediation. Then a civil suit can be filed against the employer.
California Senate Bill 306 make significant changes, which benefits employees, to existing retaliation laws.
Now when existing employees or applicants file charges of retaliation with the California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, the DLSE is authorized to begin an investigation of an employer, whether or not a complaint has been filed. The DLSE must show “reasonable cause exists to believe a violation has occurred. The DLSE can get an injunction ordering the employer to reinstate the employee until the retaliation complaint is resolved. Resolution of such complaints can easily take 2 to 3 years, but the employee must be reinstated at that time. The law, however, does allow the employer to terminate the employee for other causes during this time.
This law is very complicated with numerous moving parts. It’s one example of why individuals who think they’ve been treated illegally should always contact an employer lawyer.
Employment law can be very complicated. It’s effected by state and federal laws, and sometimes even local laws. The size of your business can make a difference as to what employment laws apply to your employer, as well as whether you are a classified or unclassified employee.
We urge you to contact us and to take advantage of our free, no-obligation, and CONFIDENTIAL consultation. Tell us your situation, and we can tell you your legal options.