Skip to main content

What I’ve Been Reading This Week


With the upcoming elections in November, I suspect we will start to see a wide range of developments on the labor & employment law front, both at the national and local levels.  It only follows that with candidates and incumbents on the ballot, their positions on minimum wage, labor rights, employment discrimination, etc. will become focal points for many voters.  While Wednesday’s announcement of California Senator Kamala Harris being selected as the Vice-Presidential nominee for the Democrats does not necessarily warrant much of a discussion at this point for the purpose of this blog, Joe Biden’s position on a relevant piece of minimum wage legislation is worth kicking things off this week.

As always, below are a couple articles that caught my eye this week.


A Closer Look at Joe Biden’s Support of the Transformation to Competitive Employment Act 

Sarah Katz at The Atlantic wrote an article recently and noted that the Democratic nominee for President, Joe Biden, has made his support of the Transformation to Competitive Employment Act a much talked about topic as of late.  For those wondering, the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) prohibits employers from discriminating against workers with a disability.  However, the ADA has a loophole that allows employers that hold a special certificate to pay disabled workers less than the federal minimum wage rate.  As a result, if it can be shown that a disabled workers only produces 1 widget an hour (compared to other employees that produce 10 widgets an hour), the employer could lawfully pay the disabled worker $.725/hour while other workers earn $7.50/hour.  As the article notes, should Joe Biden become President and if Democrats can gain majority control of both the House and Senate, this legislation which seeks to do away with this pay disparity could make the ADA loophole a thing of the past.  It will be interesting to see what comes of this legislation after November’s elections.


EEOC Provides Guidance on Employers Dealing With Opioid Accommodations

Last week, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) issued guidance in regard to employers accommodating employees that “are using opioids, are addicted to opioids, or were addicted to opioids in the past” and are not currently using the drugs illegally.  As the EEOC stated in its guidance, the Americans with Disabilities Act may require employers to accommodate these employees.  I refer readers to the EEOC’s guidance for a more thorough review of the topic.

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,...
Post a Comment
Read more

NLRB: Former Employee Cannot Be Barred From Work Premises After Filing Wage Suit

MEI-GSR Holdings, LLC - NLRB Facts :  MEI-GSR Holdings, LLC d/b/a Grand Sierra Resort & Casino ("GSR") operated a facility that included a hotel, casino, restaurant, clubs, bars, and a pool which were all open to the general public.  Tiffany Sargent ("Sargent") was briefly employed by GSR as a "beverage supervisor" in December of 2012.  After her employment ended, Sargent continued to socialize at one of the clubs.  GSR had a long standing practice of allowing former employees to patronize its facility and did not prohibit Sargent from doing so.  In June of 2013, Sargent and another employee filed a class and collective action against GSR for alleged unpaid wages, in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and Nevada law.  In July of 2014, GSR denied Sargent access to an event at one of the clubs.  GSR followed up with a letter and stated that with the on-going litigation (from the wage suit), it decided to bar Sargent from the premises. ...
1 comment
Read more

San Diego Rolls Back Vaccine Mandate For City Workers

Last Tuesday, the San Diego City Council voted to do away with the vaccine mandate for city employees. The city’s vaccine mandate that was in place required city workers to get the coronavirus vaccine or risk termination.  Perhaps to this surprise of no one, the city’s policy came under fire with 14 employees being terminated and over 100 other employees resigning.  With the coronavirus subsiding, including in Southern California, the San Diego City Council took action. Now, bear in mind, the repeal of the vaccine mandate does not take place immediately. With that being said, the mandate will be repealed March 8th.  I suppose the question now is, what other cities or regions follow San Diego’s lead? For additional information:   https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/politics/story/2023-01-24/san-diego-repeals-controversial-covid-19-vaccine-mandate-citing-drop-in-cases-hospitalizations
Post a Comment
Read more