With the proper guidelines in place, a workplace Halloween party can build teamwork and morale.

DO: Evaluate what type of Halloween festivities best fit your company’s culture.

DO: Consider ways to celebrate the occasion that minimize the chances for unwanted romantic advances and other improper conduct, for example holding a Halloween luncheon (and not a night party) or including workplace-appropriate team building games and activities.

DO: Make participation in your Halloween celebration voluntary. Respect employees who do not wish to take part.

DO: If you allow costumes, provide advance guidelines, including examples of inappropriate get-ups such as skimpy outfits and costumes likely to be insulting or offensive to other races, cultures, religions, etc.

DO: Apply discipline as needed, such as sending an employee home to change if the costume is inappropriate for the workplace.

DON’T: Allow supervisors to behave inappropriately. Supervisors and managers must be role models and set the example.

DON’T: Look the other way if an employee is being teased about his or her outfit. Such teasing can lead to a harassment claim if management stands by and does nothing.

DON’T: Encourage employees to dress as other co-workers. Such impersonations can lead to mockery or other inappropriate conduct, hurt feelings and/or harassment claims.

DON’T: Allow alcohol consumption. Your business can be liable for physical injuries incurred or sexual harassment committed by a person served alcohol at a company-sponsored party, whether on or off the job or on or off company premises.

For further assistance this holiday season, please contact one of our attorneys Tim Bowles, Cindy Bamforth or Helena Kobrin.

See also:

• Take Heed, Responding to Harassment and Discrimination Complaints Correctly (July 28, 2023)
• Employers’ Holiday Survival Guide – Avoid Drunk and Disorderly and Keep People Safe (December 10, 2021)

Tim Bowles
October 11, 2024

California employers must prominently display a workplace whistleblowers’ rights and responsibilities notice.

The Labor Commissioner’s Office’s (LCO) existing “Whistleblowers are Protected” sample notice states the agency “believes” (but does not guarantee) that its text complies with applicable law.

On July 15, 2024, Governor Newsom signed AB 2299, which:

• Requires the LCO to develop and release an updated notice by January 1, 2025; and
• Confirms that displaying such notice satisfies an employer’s posting requirement.

Take-Aways:

Employers should continue posting the LCO’s sample notice (which is also contained the California Chamber of Commerce’s all-in-one state and federal poster) until the LCO releases its updated notice.

For further information, please contact Tim Bowles, Cindy Bamforth or Helena Kobrin.

See also:

• Accommodate, Don’t Retaliate- Superstore to Pay $75,000 for Disability Discrimination and Retaliation (August 30, 2024)
• Retaliation Wake-Up Call: Employer Discipline, Termination May Be Presumed Illegal (December 1, 2023)

Cindy Bamforth
October 4, 2024

Election Code 14000 requires an employer to provide an employee either beginning or end of shift time off to vote in a statewide election if that person cannot otherwise do so outside work hours. The company must pay for up to two hours of that voting time.

An employee who knows of the need for time off to vote three days before the election must inform the employer at least two days before that date.

Election Code 14001 requires that employees post a notice of those rights at least 10 days before an election. October 26 is the last day to post such a notice prior to the November 5, 2024 election.

The Secretary of State’s website contains a page with these rules, providing the notice in several languages.

Take-Aways:

Employers should get their voting rights notices up by October 26.

For further assistance, please contact one of our attorneys, Tim Bowles, Cindy Bamforth or Helena Kobrin.

See Also:

• Grin and Bear It: Political Views in the Workplace (July 12, 2024)
• Work Time Off for Voting (June 7, 2024)

Helena Kobrin
October 4, 2024

The California Labor Commissioner’s Office (LCO) has obtained a $1.7 million settlement from a Bakersfield-based Wingstop restaurant franchisee on behalf of 550 employees.

The LCO’s investigation found the owner had shuttled workers between his five Wingstops locations to deprive them of minimum wage, overtime, and meal breaks.

By treating each location as a separate employer in violation of Revenue and Taxation Code section 23626, the workers improperly received the lower minimum wage rate designated for employers with 25 or fewer employees.

As a result of moving locations during the workday, employees were:

• Denied overtime pay;
• Not compensated for missed meal breaks; and
• Not paid for time traveling from one location to another.

Labor Commissioner Lilia Garcia-Brower stated: “This case highlights abuses that take place in low-wage industries such as franchised fast-food restaurants where separate corporate entities are created by the same employer to improperly lower labor costs. The law is clear that such corporate schemes undercut law-abiding employers and circumvent worker protections.”

Take-Aways:

To avoid wage-related violations and penalties, businesses with multiple locations must obtain proper legal and tax advice. Our firm can conduct friendly reviews of company payroll and documentation practices before any government agency comes knocking with real or imagined employee grievances and millions in potential damages.

For further information, please contact Tim Bowles, Cindy Bamforth or Helena Kobrin.

See also:

• Munched for Lunch – No Break for Paying Employee’s Meal Times (September 20, 2024)
• Timekeeping Policy – Fourth Dimension Attention: It’s in the Cards (February 24, 2023)

Cindy Bamforth
September 27, 2024

California regularly expands the already long list of unpaid required leaves of absence, during which the employer must hold the worker’s position open pending return. These include pregnancy, family/medical, disability leaves, and many more. See, for example, Handbook Helper Episode 38; Bereavement Leave Policy (September 21, 2023).

Employers also have discretion to approve unpaid leaves for a host of other reasons not (yet) covered by the Labor Code such as a long-term sabbatical or attending school. The company policy manual should lay out the conditions for such a leave:

• can require use of paid leave and vacation for the absence;

• may count as part of the worker’s family/medical leave entitlement (up to 12 workweeks in a 12-month period);

• group health insurance plan, pension and retirement plan or supplemental insurance plan offered by the Company will continue during the leave only to the extent required by each plan or by law;

• limit such leaves to six months or other duration;

• vacation/paid time off and paid sick leave do not accrue during such a leave;

• while there are no “guarantee of return” rights after such a leave, if employee is reinstated, management will seek to place him/her in a position for which the employee is qualified;

• if the employee fails to return by the final day of approved leave, the employer may conclude the worker has voluntarily resigned.

Policy Drafting Tip:

Covered employers can, but are not required to, implement a policy for discretionary personal leaves of absence. That policy – as well as the documentation approving a particular leave – should include the limiting provisions as above.

Take-Aways:

Implement and regularly review your handbook to include all applicable leave policies, including voting leave, and educate and train your supervisors on these laws.

We publish this series to educate employers on best practices for a well-written handbook that assists applicants, employees, and management alike. To purchase our current template handbook – which contains the above policy and much more – and accompanying forms or for more information, please contact Office Manager Aimee Rosales at 626.583.6600 or officemgr@tbowleslaw.com.

See also:

• Work Time Off for Voting (June 7, 2024)
• Reproductive Loss Leave (November 2, 2023)

Helena Kobrin
September 20, 2024

If an employer is looking for any slack for inadvertent errors in its pay practices, California’s highly technical meal and rest break rules offer no sympathy. In this state’s overheated climate of class action litigation, just a few seemingly minor violations of these standards can mean hundreds of thousands, if not millions, in potential liabilities. See, Trust Me, I’m a Lawyer – Mass Employment Litigation is No Fun (August 30, 2024).

For instance, full time hourly workers must begin their off-duty meal period by the “end of the fifth hour” from the beginning of a shift (i.e., four hours, 59 minutes, 59 seconds) with that break at least 30 minutes long. Labor Code 512. On any day where an employer fails to provide meal breaks within these boundaries, it automatically owes the workers affected an extra hour of “premium pay.” Labor Code 226.7.

Facing a class action and PAGA suit for such violations, manufacturer Royalty Carpet Mills of Porterville asserted its voluntarily paying its employees for their off-duty meal time should be credited against whatever premium pay the company might owe. After all, the employer reasoned, how were its employees harmed if they had already received the equivalent of any such potential liability?

However, while paying for lunch time was commendable, Royalty learned its generosity bought them no respite from the impact of the meal rules.

“ … Royalty suggests the amount of premium pay awarded by the court should be offset by the regular wages it paid to Porterville employees during their meal periods. But no offset applies because premium pay under section 226.7 serves a different purpose than wages. Rather than compensating employees for time worked, it is awarded for the noneconomic injuries suffered by them due to deprivation of a compliant meal period.

“Section 226.7 is not aimed at protecting or providing employees’ wages. Instead, the statute is primarily concerned with ensuring the health and welfare of employees by requiring that employers provide meal and rest periods as mandated ... Even if the employee ‘is paid for the 30 minutes of work, the employee has been deprived of the right to be free of the employer’s control during the meal period.’”

Take-Aways:

The best defense against mass-litigation claiming an employer’s Labor Code violations is to operate in well-documented full compliance, adjusting policies and protocols to meet the regular refinements of these laws. An employer big-hearted enough to compensate its workers for their off-duty meal times will not find its beneficence rewarded in the courts.

For further information, please contact Tim Bowles, Cindy Bamforth or Helena Kobrin.

See also:

• PAGA Monster Declawed- Major Relief for Responsible Employers (June 28, 2024)
• Timekeeping Policy – Fourth Dimension Attention: It’s in the Cards (February 24, 2023)
• Please: Document Workplace Meal Breaks – Require Employees to Clock Out and Back In on Their Meals (June 4, 2021)

Tim Bowles
September 20, 2024

National Raisin will pay $2 million and its co-employer Select Staffing $500,000 to settle sexual harassment allegations brought by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).

The case charged a sexually hostile work environment at National Raisin, with supervisors taking no effective action to stop the harassment despite complaints that seasonal female workers were subject to “frequent unwanted groping, sexually explicit comments, requests for sexual favors, and retaliatory termination following complaints of harassment.”

The settlement requires Select Staffing to train temporary workers on their federal rights to be harassment free and to train executives and HR personnel to investigate, correct and prevent harassment. Select Staffing must also document complaints and actively ensure clients take appropriate corrective measures.

Anna Park, regional attorney for the EEOC’s Los Angeles District Office, said: “We are seeing repeated issues with staffing agencies who ignore harassment of temporary workers on assignment. Staffing agencies are the direct employers of temporary workers; like all employers, Title VII requires that staffing agencies take action to protect their employees if they learn of third-party harassment at client worksites. We commend the women who came forward despite their fears and encourage others not to stay silent. To the EEOC, no one is above the law.”

For further information, please contact Tim Bowles, Cindy Bamforth or Helena Kobrin.

See also:

• Wolfman’s Extinction Looms: Supermarket Chain Charged for Allowing Years of Sexual Harassment (July 19, 2024)

Helena Kobrin
September 13, 2024

The California Civil Rights Department (CRD) has obtained a $14,425,000 settlement from Microsoft Corporation for allegedly discriminating and retaliating against employees returning from disability, pregnancy, and family caretaking leave.

The settlement resolves a multi-year investigation related to Microsoft’s denial of annual bonuses and/or promotions to workers who took protected leave under California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act, the California Family Rights Act, California’s Pregnancy Disability Leave law, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Americans with Disabilities Act.

As part of the settlement, Microsoft will implement proactive steps to prevent future discrimination.

CRD Director Kevin Kish stated: “Whether it’s to look after a newborn child or take care of your own health, workers generally have the right to take time off without worrying about consequences at work. By allegedly penalizing employees for taking protected forms of leave, Microsoft failed to support workers when they needed to care for themselves or their families. The settlement…will provide direct relief to impacted workers and safeguard against future discrimination at the company. We applaud Microsoft for coming to the table and agreeing to make the changes necessary to protect workers in California.”

Take-Aways:

Covered employers must correctly implement all applicable leave laws and ensure managers do not consider protected time off when determining compensation and promotions.

For further information, please contact Tim Bowles, Cindy Bamforth or Helena Kobrin.

See also:

• Pregnancy Disability Leaves Policy (August 2, 2023)
• Family and Medical Leaves Policy (July 20, 2023)

Cindy Bamforth
September 11, 2024

California’s Paid Family Leave (PFL) -- a temporary disability program administered by the state’s Employment Development Department (EDD) -- provides up to eight weeks of state-funded partial wage replacement benefits for workers needing time off to care for a seriously ill family member, bond with a new child, or participate in a qualifying military event.
Small businesses may apply for state grants up to $2,000 per employee on PFL to offset increased overhead, such as to cross-train existing staff and hire and train new and/or temporary employees.

The grant period is June 1, 2024 to May 31, 2026 or until funds run out. To qualify, the business must:

• Have at least one employee who used the PFL program on or after June 1, 2024;
• Employ between 1 and 100 employees;
• Register to do business in California;
• Be in active status with the California Secretary of State; and
• Possess a California Employer Account Number for filing payroll taxes.

Take-Aways:

For more details, visit www.CaliforniaPFL.com

For further information, please contact Tim Bowles, Cindy Bamforth, or Helena Kobrin.

See also:

• Time Cushion – Modifications to California’s Mandatory Paid Family Leave Pamphlet (August 12, 2022)
• California Paid Family Leave Overview – Is California’s Paid Family Leave a Protected Leave of Absence? (August 3, 2018)

Cindy Bamforth
September 6, 2024