Skip to main content

New Laws for 2020: Senate Bill 2193 (Hawaii)

 

On September 15th, Hawaii Governor David Ige signed Senate Bill 2193 into law which impacts the state’s ban the box legislation, which has been in effect since 1998.

Prior to the passage of Senate Bill 2193, the state’s ban the box legislation had a ten year “look back” period in which employers could consider felony and misdemeanor convictions of applicants.  Any felony or misdemeanor convictions past ten years could not be considered when choosing whether to hire the applicant.  The ban the box legislation also required employers to apply a “rational relationship” test before they could deny an employment position after conducting a background check.  Under this “rational relationship” test, an employer could only consider those convictions that occurred within the ten year window if there was a “rational relationship” between the conviction and the prospective job.

Senate Bill 2193 rewrites the state’s ban the box legislation in a few ways:  1) Felonies older than seven years and misdemeanors older than five years are no longer to be considered (unless they fall within one of several statutory exemptions); and 2) a suitability determination (in regard to the relevant criminal history) may not occur until after the conditional job offer has been made.

While minimum wage legislation has been all the rage in the past few years, this is a noteworthy development in the area of ban the box legislation.


For a copy of Senate Bill 2193:  https://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/session2020/Bills/GM1156_.pdf

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

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

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