Skip to main content

One to Keep An Eye On: S2844B (New York)


As with many employment and labor law related cases (and bills) being litigated around the country, there are always a few that stand out.  This is one to keep an eye on.


Recently, the New York State Legislature passed S2844B, a bill that would enable an employer's current or former employee or the New York State Department of Labor to place a lien on an employer's interest in real or personal property for the face value of a wage claim (plus liquidated damages.)  In New York, a wage claim is defined as a claim for a violation of New York Labor Law Sections 170 (hours for labor for domestic workers), 193 (deductions from wages), 196-d (gratuities), or 652 and 673 (minimum wages), as well as the related regulations and wage orders promulgated by the labor commissioner.  A wage claim also includes a claim for wages due to an employee pursuant to an employment contract that were unpaid in violation of that employment contract as well as a claim for a violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

While the lien may be filed at any time, it may not be filed later than three years following the end of the employee's employment giving rise to the wage claim.  As well, the lien may not be placed on an employer's bank account or goods.

However, despite these restrictions, many employers in the state have expressed concern about the reach of the legislation.  As some have argued, if New York Governor Andrew Cuomo signs S2844B into law, it could potentially freeze credit needed by small employers (as a lien might have some banks deciding not to issue credit to these small employers.)  As well, the argument has been made that employees would have unfair leverage, with the ability to file these liens against employers.  It will be interesting to see whether Governor Cuomo puts pen to paper here.  Stay tuned.


For a copy of S2844B:  https://legislation.nysenate.gov/pdf/bills/2019/S2844B

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum, it was noted that emplo
Post a Comment
Read more

What I’ve Been Reading This Week

A few years ago, I remember when the “Fight for $15” movement was taking off around the country.  Lo and behold, it appears that a $15/hour minimum wage is not the stopping point, which should be no surprise.  As the below article notes, New York is aggressively moving to ramp up hourly wage rates even higher.  While all the  below articles are worth a read, I called particular attention to that one. As always, below are a couple article that caught my eye this week. Disney World Workers Reject Latest Contract Offer Late last week, it was announced that workers at Disney World had rejected the most recent contract offer from the company, calling on their employer to do better.  As Brooks Barnes at The New York Times writes, the unions that represent about 32,000 workers at Disney World reported their members resoundingly rejected the 5 year contract offer which would have seen workers receive a 10% raise and retroactive increased back pay.  While Disney’s offer would have increased pa
Post a Comment
Read more

Utah Non-Compete Bill Falters in House

Last month, a non-compete bill sponsored by Representative Brian Greene (Republican from Pleasant Grove) & up for vote in the Utah House failed to make it through the Legislature.  The bill sought to ban enforcement of non-competes if they came after a worker was already employed, given no compensation (such as a bonus or promotion) for signing the non-compete, and laid off within six months.  However, by a 22 - 49 vote, the bill was resoundingly defeated after some business groups lobbied to kill the non-compete bill.  One group in particular, The Free Enterprise Utah coalition, argued that the Utah State Legislature should hold off on any changes to non compete laws in the state until a survey about non competes was done among Utah businesses.  Representative Greene had countered this claim and argued that a survey was not needed to show that the current non compete laws in the states allowed many businesses, including some small high tech companies in the state, to per
Post a Comment
Read more