Category Archives: Delaware

NEW LAW: Sexual Harassment Training Now Required For Delaware Employees

On August 29, 2018, Delaware Governor John Carney signed House Bill 360 into law.  This new law, which goes into effect on January 1, 2019, amends the Delaware Discrimination in Employment Act by prohibiting sexual harassment in the workplace and imposing new requirements regarding sexual harassment training on most Delaware employers.

The new law makes it clear that both sexual harassment and retaliation are prohibited in employment in Delaware.  Sexual harassment is defined as “conduct that includes unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature.”  Such conduct is unlawful where:

  • submission to such conduct is made either explicitly or implicitly a term or condition of an employee’s employment;
  • submission to or rejection of such conduct is used as the basis for employment decisions affecting an employee; or
  • such conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an employee’s work performance or creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment.

Continue reading NEW LAW: Sexual Harassment Training Now Required For Delaware Employees

NEW LAW: Delaware’s Minimum Wage to Increase October 1, 2018

On July 1, 2018, Delaware Governor John Carney signed Senate Bill 170 and House Bill 483 into law.  These new laws will increase Delaware’s minimum wage to $10.25 per hour and will establish a training wage and youth wage.

Under the new law ( Senate Bill 170 ), Delaware’s minimum wage will increase in accordance with the following schedule:

  • October 1, 2018 increases to $8.75 per hour (the minimum wage for tipped employees remains $2.23 per hour)
  • October 1, 2019 increases to $9.25 per hour (the minimum wage for tipped employees remains $2.23 per hour)
  • October 1, 2020 increases to $9.75 per hour (the minimum wage for tipped employees remains $2.23 per hour)
  • October 1, 2021 increases to $10.25 per hour (the minimum wage for tipped employees remains $2.23 per hour)

In addition, starting January 1, 2019, Delaware  an employer will be allowed to pay 50 cents less than the minimum wage to:

  • Employees who are 18 years of age or older during the first 90 consecutive calendar days after they are initially employed by the employer; and
  • Employees who are under 18 years of age.

NOTE:  While  Senate Bill 170 states that the minimum wage is to increase on October 1, 2018, the synopsis of House Bill 483 indicates that minimum wage is increasing on January 1, 2019.  In light of this contradiction, it is recommended that Delaware employers plan for the increase to take place on October 1st until clarified by the state.

New Laws Effective in 2018

Aside from the minimum wage increases, there are a number of new laws going into effect in the new year.

While many of these have been addressed in detail in previous articles, the following is a summary of the new laws/regulations that may be going into effect in your state …

State New Law
California AB 46 – Amends the California Equal Pay Act to define “employer” to include public and private employers.

Effective January 1, 2018

AB 168 – Adds §432.3 to the California Labor Code, which prohibits employers from inquiring into and relying on an applicant’s salary history during the hiring process.

Effective January 1, 2018

AB 260 & SB 225 – Makes two changes the Human Trafficking required notice: (1) additional businesses (including hotels, motels, and bed and breakfast inns) are required to post the notice and (2) the notice must include a text number to access support and services.

Effective January 1, 2018

AB 450 – Employers are prohibited from providing ICE agents with access to their worksite and/or records without a warrant.

Effective January 1, 2018

AB 1008 – Amends the California Fair Employment and Housing Act to include a “ban-the-box” provision, which prohibits employers from inquiring about an applicant’s criminal history before the employer has made a conditional offer of employment.

Effective January 1, 2018

AB 1701 – Adds §218.7 to the California Labor Code, which requires direct contractors to assume liability for unpaid wages, benefits, and/or contributions owed by its subcontractors.

Effective January 1, 2018

AB 1710 – Expands protections to members of the military and veterans by prohibiting employers from discriminating against these individuals in the terms and conditions of employment.

Effective January 1, 2018

SB 63 (New Parent Leave Act) – Requires employers who employs 20+ employees within 75 miles of a worksite provide eligible employees with up to 12 weeks of unpaid parental leave to bond with a new child within one year of the child’s birth, adoption, or foster care placement.  Employers are not required to provide this leave to employees who are eligible for CFRA and FMLA.

Effective January 1, 2018

SB 258 (Cleaning Product Right to Know Act of 2017) – Requires employers who are required to make a safety data sheet readily accessible to its employees also provide employees with information regarding exposure to potentially harmful chemicals in designated cleaning products.

Effective January 1, 2018

SB306 – Authorizes the DLSE to commence an investigation of an employer, with or without a complaint being filed, when retaliation or discrimination is suspected during the course of a wage claim or other specified investigation being conducted by the Labor Commissioner.

Effective January 1, 2018

SB396 – Amends the California Fair Employment and Housing Act to require employers with 5+ employees post a notice in the workplace regarding transgender rights.  Also requires employers with 50+ employees to include harassment based on gender identity, gender expression, and sexual orientation in their anti-harassment training programs.

Effective January 1, 2018

Connecticut HB 7037 – Requires employers to provide information regarding child support garnishments to their workers’ compensation carrier when making an initial report of occupational illness or injury to the carrier.

Effective January 1, 2018

Delaware HS 1 — Prohibits employers from inquiring into and relying on an applicant’s salary history during the hiring process.

Effective December 14, 2017

Hawaii SB 1007 – Changes the reporting frequency of withheld income tax from monthly reporting to quarterly reporting for all employers.

Effective January 1, 2018

Illinois SB 318 – Prohibits employers from (1) using (or requiring an applicant/employee provide) genetic information in employment decisions (2) discriminating against an employee because of genetic information or testing, or (3) retaliating against an employee who refuses to disclose genetic information.

Effective January 1, 2018

SB 1895 – Prohibits employers from disciplining or terminating an employee who also serves as a volunteer emergency medical services personnel or as a volunteer firefighter by his or her employer for responding to an emergency call or emergency text message during work hours that requests the employee’s volunteer emergency medical services or volunteer firefighter services.

Effective January 1, 2018

Maine LD 1477 – Requires the Department of Labor and the Maine Human Rights Commission develop and make available a training guide setting forth the sexual harassment training requirements for employers’ use and increases the penalties imposed on employers for violating the notice and sexual harassment training requirements.

Effective November 1, 2017

LD 88 – Delayed the effective date of certain portions of the Maine Marijuana Legalization Act until 2/1/2018.

Effective February 1, 2018

Massachusetts HB 3680 (Massachusetts Pregnant Workers Fairness Act) – Prohibits workplace and hiring discrimination related to pregnancy and nursing, and requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations for expectant and new mothers in the workplace.

Effective April 1, 2018

SB 2119 – Amends the Massachusetts Equal Pay Act by (1) requiring employers to provide “equal pay” for “comparable” work, (2) prohibiting inquiries into an applicant’s salary history.

Effective July 1, 2018

Nevada AB 76 – Amends the existing law to remove the requirement that the Central Repository provide certain criminal history information to employers and repeals certain immunities previously provided to employers.

Effective January 1, 2018

SB 361 – Requires Nevada employers to provide employees who are victims of domestic violence with up to 160 hours of domestic violence leave in a 12-month period.

Effective January 1, 2018

New York SB 2543 – Extends the anti-smoking provisions of Public Health Law § 1399-n (which prohibits smoking in certain public areas) to include “vaping” and the use of e-cigarettes.

Effective November 22, 2018

AB A9006C & SB 6406 – Requires employers to provide eligible employees with up to 12 weeks of Paid Family Leave in a 12-month period for qualifying reasons.

Effective January 1, 2018

North Carolina SB 407 (Employee Fair Classification Act) – Creates the Employee Classification Section within the Industrial Commission, which will be responsible for investigating suspected employee misclassification.  Also requires employers post notice relating to employee misclassification.

Effective October 1, 2017

Ohio Admin. Code 4141-11-01 – Requires employers provide all quarterly contribution and wage reports electronically.

Effective January 1, 2018

Oregon HB 3008 — Prohibits employer from requiring employee to create, file or sign documents containing information that employer knows is false related to hours worked or compensation received by employee.

Effective January 1, 2018

SB 299 – Amends the Oregon paid sick leave law to allow employers to limit number of hours of sick time that employees may accrue per year.

Effective January 1, 2018

SB 769 – Enhances protections for the privacy of social security numbers by prohibiting persons (including employers) from disposing of (or transferring to another person for disposal) materials that display an individual’s Social Security number unless (1) before disposing of the material, the person makes Social Security number unreadable or unrecoverable or (2) the person ensures that person that ultimately disposes of media or material makes Social Security number unreadable or unrecoverable.

Effective January 1, 2018

SB828 — Requires large employers in specified industries (employers with 500+ employees in retail, hospitality, and food services) to provide new employee with estimated work schedule and to provide current employee with seven days’ notice of employee work schedule.

Effective July 1, 2018

Rhode Island HB 5182 & SB 175 — Prohibits the use of a non-hands-free personal wireless communication device while operating a motor vehicle, except for public safety personnel or in an emergency situation

Effective June 1, 2018

HB 5413 & SB 290 (Paid Sick Leave Law) — Requires employers with eighteen (18) or more employees to provide three (3) paid sick days in 2018, four (4) paid sick days in 2019 and five (5) paid sick days thereafter.

Effective July 1, 2018

SB 676 — Creates a statutory vehicle for the creation and functioning of workers’ cooperatives which are corporations that are owned and democratically governed by their members.

Effective January 1, 2018

Utah SB 249 — Requires employers to file a quarterly withholding return in an electronic format

Effective January 1, 2018

Vermont HB 136 — Requires employers provide a reasonable accommodation for an employee’s pregnancy-related condition, unless the accommodation would impose an undue hardship on the employer.

Effective January 1, 2018

HB 462 — Prohibits employers from requiring, requesting, or coercing an employee to provide a social media account username or password, or to present or divulge social media content to the employer. Also prohibits employers from requiring or coercing an employee to add the employer to his or her list of contacts for a social media account.

Effective January 1, 2018

Virginia HB 1646 & SB 1333 – Reduces the maximum portion of an employee’s disposable earnings subject to garnishment.

Effective July 1, 2018

Washington Initiative No. 1433 (Paid Sick Leave Law) – Requires employers to provide paid sick leave to eligible employees.

Effective January 1, 2018

2018 MINIMUM WAGE CHECK-UP

With various cities and counties having enacted local minimum wages and 18 states (Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Hawaii, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Missouri, New Jersey, New York*, Ohio, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Vermont, Washington) are increasing their own minimum wages on January 1st (December 31st for New York), employers should take time to verify that they are meeting the minimum wage requirements of their state/city/county.

The below chart sets forth the minimum wage effective January 1, 2018.

employer PAYS $1.50/hr towards medical benefits$11.91

Federal $7.25
State City/County  Amount?
Alabama  $7.25
Alaska*  $9.84
Arizona* — all cities/counties except …  $10.50
Flagstaff* $11.00
Arkansas  $8.50
California* — all cities/counties except …                                  small employer (25 or less) $10.50
large employer (26 or more) $11.00
Berkeley  $13.75
Cupertino* $13.50
El Cerrito*  $13.60
Emeryville                                           small employer (55 or less) $14.00
large employer (56 or more) $15.20
Los Altos* $13.50
Los Angeles                                         small employer (25 or less) $10.50
large employer (26 or more) $12.00
Malibu                                                  small employer (25 or less) $10.50
large employer (26 or more) $12.00
Milpitas* $12.00
Mountain View* $15.00
Oakland $12.86
Palo Alto* $13.50
Pasadena                                             small employer (25 or less) $10.50
large employer (26 or more) $12.00
Richmond*                                             employer does NOT pay $1.50/hr towards medical benefits $13.41
employer PAYS $1.50/hr towards medical benefits $11.91
Sacramento*                                      small employer (100 or less) $10.50
large employer (101 or more) $11.00
San Diego $11.50
San Francisco $14.00
San Jose* $13.50
San Leandro $13.00
San Mateo*                                                 For-profit organizations $13.50
Non-profit organizations $12.00
Santa Clara* $13.00
Santa Monica                                       small employer (25 or less) $10.50
large employer (26 or more) $12.00
Sunnyvale* $15.00
Los Angeles County                            small employer (25 or less)

unincorporated areas                            large employer (26 or more)

$10.50

$12.00

Colorado* $10.20
Connecticut $10.10
Delaware $8.25
Florida* $8.25
Georgia $7.25
Hawaii* $10.10
Idaho $7.25
Illinois — all cities/counties except … $8.25
Chicago $11.00
Cook County

(except for the Village of Barrington)

$10.00
Indiana $7.25
Iowa $7.25
Kansas $7.25
Kentucky $7.25
Louisiana $7.25
Maine* — all cities/counties except … $10.00
Portland $10.68
Maryland — all cities/counties except … $9.25
Montgomery County $11.50
Prince George’s County $11.50
Massachusetts $11.00
Michigan* $9.25
Minnesota* — all cities/counties except … “small employers” (employers with an annual sales volume of less than $500,000) $7.87
“large employers” (employers with an annual sales volume of $500,000+) $9.65
Minneapolis                                         large employer (101 or more) $10.00
Mississippi $7.25
Missouri $7.85
Montana* $8.30
Nebraska $9.00
Nevada $8.25
New Hampshire $7.25
New Jersey* $8.60
New Mexico — all cities/counties except … $7.50
Albuquerque*                                             employer provides benefits $7.95
employer does NOT provide benefits $8.95
Las Cruces* $9.45
Santa Fe $11.09
Bernalillo County*unincorporated areas                                             employer provides benefits $7.85
employer does NOT provide benefits $8.85
Santa Fe County unincorporated areas $11.09
New York**  “Upstate” employers (excluding fast food employees) $10.40
“Downstate” employers (excluding fast food employees) $11.00
“Small” NYC employers (excluding fast food employees $12.00
Fast food employees outside NYC $11.75
“Large” NYC employers (excluding fast food employees) $13.00
Fast food employees inside NYC $13.50
North Carolina $7.25
North Dakota $7.25
Ohio* $8.30
Oklahoma $7.25
Oregon — all cities/counties except … $10.25
Portland $11.25
Nonurban Counties 

(Baker, Coos, Crook, Curry, Douglas, Gilliam, Grant, Harney, Jefferson, Klmath, Lake, Malheur, Morrow, Sherman, Umatilla, Union, Wallowa Wheeler counties)

$10.00
Pennsylvania $7.25
Rhode Island* $10.10
South Carolina $7.25
South Dakota* $8.85
Tennessee $7.25
Texas $7.25
Utah $7.25
Vermont* $10.50
Virginia $7.25
Washington* — all cities/counties except … $11.50
City of SeaTac* (hospitality and transportation workers) $15.64
Seattle* $14.00
small employer who does not pay towards medical benefits

(500 or less)

small employer who does pay towards medical benefits

(500 or less)

$11.50
large employer who does not pay towards medical benefits

(501 or more)

$15.00
large employer who does pay towards medical benefits

(501 or more)

$15.45
Tacoma* $12.00
Washington DC $12.50
West Virginia $8.75
Wisconsin $7.25
Wyoming $7.25
 * = increase in minimum wage effective January 1, 2018

** = increase in minimum wage effective December 31, 2017

 

Caveat: Please be advised that this information is being provided as a courtesy and that ePlace Solutions, Inc. does not track local laws and ordinances and will not update this information with changes in local laws and ordinances.

 

 

NEW LAW – Delaware Prohibits Past Salary History Inquiries

On June 14, 2017, Delaware Governor John Carney signed House Bill #1 into law. This new law is intended to address the gender pay gap by prohibiting employers from asking job applicants about their salary history.

Specifically, this new law prohibits an employer or its agent from “screening applicants based on their compensation histories, including by requiring that an applicant’s prior compensation satisfy minimum or maximum criteria” or “seeking the compensation history of an applicant from the applicant or a current or former employer.”  For purposes of this law, “compensation” includes wages as well as “benefits and other forms of compensation.”

The new law does not prohibit employers from discussing and/or negotiating salary demands with job applicants about their compensation – provided that the applicant’s salary history is neither requested nor required. Employers are also not prohibited from discussing the applicant’s salary history with the applicant and/or setting compensation based on prior salary history — if the job applicant voluntarily discloses his/her prior compensation history.

Finally, the law only prohibits employers from actively seeking an applicant’s salary history during the interview process. Once an offer of employment with terms of compensation has been extended, the employer can request and obtain compensation history, but only for the sole purpose of confirming the job applicants’ compensation history.

This new law goes into effect in December of 2017. In the interim, the Delaware Department of Labor is required to post guidance materials on its website relating to this new law. It is recommended that Delaware employers review the provisions of the new law and verify that their application process does not include prior salary inquiries. Delaware employers should also review the materials on the Delaware Department of Labor website once available.

Employer Dos and Don’ts for Elections

In a previous article (Does Your State Require Voting Leave?), we broke down which states require employers to provide employees with time off to vote. In addition to these voting leave laws, many states have other laws in place that regulate what employers can, and more importantly, what an employer cannot do with respect to an election.

Below is a summary of the applicable laws for each state:

Alabama Employers may not:

·         Use coercion (e.g. Threatening to discharge an employee; reducing an employee’s compensation or benefits; punitively changing an employee’s schedule or job description; reducing compensation) to influence an employee’s vote in an election and

·         Seek to examine an employee’s ballot.

Alaska Employer may not threaten to inflict damage, harm, or loss to induce an employee to vote or refrain from voting in an election.
Arizona Employers may not

·         Coerce employees to support (or not) a referendum or recall;

·         Include with employees’ paychecks any statements to influence the political opinions or actions of employees; or

·         Display any notice within 90 days before an election that attempts to influence employees to support (or not) a particular candidate by stating that if a candidate succeeds, there will be consequences in the workplace.

Arkansas Employers may not use threats or efforts to intimidate individuals with respect to whether and how they choose to vote.
California Employers may not

·         Prevent an employee from participating in politics;

·         Direct the political activities or affiliations of an employee; or

·         Threaten to discharge an employee for engaging or refusing to engage in certain political activity.

Colorado Employers may not

·         Threaten to discharge employees because of their political party affiliation;

·         Create or enforce a policy to prevent an employee from participating in politics; or

·         Discharge an employee for voting in an election or advocating for a particular candidate or political viewpoint while off duty.

Connecticut Employers may not discipline or discharge employees for exercising their First Amendment rights.
Delaware Employers may not coerce any employee with respect to his political activity.
Florida Employers may not

·         Discharge or threaten to discharge employees for how they voted in an election.

·         Use coercion to get an employee to register to vote or support a certain candidate.

Georgia Employers may not

·         Coerce employees to support (or not) a recall;

·         Use threats or efforts to intimidate individuals with respect to whether and how they choose to vote.

Hawaii Employers may not use coercion (e.g. Threatening to discharge an employee; reducing an employee’s compensation or benefits; punitively changing an employee’s schedule or job description; reducing compensation) to influence an employee’s vote in an election.
Idaho Employers may not use coercion (e.g. Threatening to discharge an employee; reducing an employee’s compensation or benefits; punitively changing an employee’s schedule or job description; reducing compensation) to influence an employee’s vote in an election.
Illinois Employers may not

·         Use coercion (e.g. Threatening to discharge an employee; reducing an employee’s compensation or benefits; punitively changing an employee’s schedule or job description; reducing compensation) to influence an employee’s vote in an election

·         Keep records relating to employees’ off-duty political activities, unless the employee gives authorization and/or provides those records to the employer

·         Punish an employee for his off-duty use of “lawful products” (which could include comments made on social media).

Indiana Employers may not

·         Coerce employees to support (or not) a referendum or recall;

·         Include with employees’ paychecks any statements to influence the political opinions or actions of employees; or

·         Attempt to influence employees to support (or not) a particular candidate by stating that if a candidate succeeds, there will be consequences in the workplace.

Iowa Employers may not use coercion to get an employee to register to vote, to support a certain candidate, or to sign a petition.
Kansas Employers may not coerce any employee with respect to his political activity.
Kentucky Employers may not

·         Use coercion (e.g. Threatening to discharge an employee; reducing an employee’s compensation or benefits; punitively changing an employee’s schedule or job description; reducing compensation) to influence an employee’s vote in an election

·         Distribute any materials stating that employees are expected to vote for a particular candidate; or

·         Attempt to induce employees to vote a certain way in a state election.

Louisiana Employers may not

·         Threaten to discharge employees or otherwise intimidate employees because of their political party affiliation;

·         Allow an employee’s political contributions to affect his employment (including compensation)

Employers with 20+ employees may not

·         Prevent employees from participating in politics;

·         Control employees’ political activities or affiliations; or

·         Threaten to discharge employees if they support certain political parties or activities

 

Maine No laws relating to politics in the workplace
Maryland Employers may not

·         Influence employees’ voting activity through intimidation or bribery;

·         Include with employees’ paychecks any statements to influence the political opinions or actions of employees; or

·         Display any notice within 90 days before an election that attempts to influence employees to support (or not) a particular candidate by stating that if a candidate succeeds, there will be consequences in the workplace

Massachusetts Employers may not coerce any employee with respect to his political activity.
Michigan Employers may not

·         Use coercion (e.g. Threatening to discharge an employee; reducing an employee’s compensation or benefits; punitively changing an employee’s schedule or job description; reducing compensation) to influence an employee’s vote in an election

·         Keep records relating to employees’ off-duty political activities, unless the employee gives authorization and/or provides those records to the employer or the records pertain to activities that took place at work

Minnesota Employers may not coerce any employee with respect to his political activity.
Mississippi Employers may not interfere with the political rights of employees.
Missouri Employers may not

·         Coerce any employee with respect to his or her political activity or

·         Prevent employees from engaging in political activities.

Montana Employers may not coerce any employee with respect to his political activity.
Nebraska Employers may not

·         Coerce any employee with respect to his political activity or

·         Close the business as a result of election results.

Nevada Employers may not

·         Prohibit employees from engaging in politics or serving in public office

·         Punish an employee for his off-duty use of “lawful products” (which could include comments made on social media).

New Hampshire Employers may not coerce any employee with respect to his political activity.
New Jersey Employers may not

·         Coerce any employee with respect to his political activity;

·         Include with employees’ paychecks any statements to influence the political opinions or actions of employees;

·         Display any notice within 90 days before an election that attempts to influence employees to support (or not) a particular candidate by stating that if a candidate succeeds, there will be consequences in the workplace; or

·         Require employees to attend employer-sponsored political meetings.

New Mexico Employers may not coerce any employee with respect to his political activity.
New York Employers may not punish an employee for his off-duty political activities.
North Carolina Employers may not

·         Coerce any employee with respect to his political activity;

·         Punish an employee for his off-duty use of “lawful products” (which could include comments made on social media).

North Dakota Employers may not punish an employee for his off-duty political activities.
Ohio Employers may not

·         Coerce any employee with respect to his political activity; or

·         Attempt to influence an employee’s political beliefs.

Oklahoma Employers may not coerce any employee with respect to his political activity.
Oregon Employers may not coerce any employee with respect to his political activity.
Pennsylvania Employers may not

·         Coerce any employee with respect to his political activity;

·         Include with employees’ paychecks any statements to influence the political opinions or actions of employees; or

·         Display any notice within 90 days before an election that attempts to influence employees to support (or not) a particular candidate by stating that if a candidate succeeds, there will be consequences in the workplace.

Rhode Island Employers may not

·         Coerce any employee with respect to his political activity;

·         Include with employees’ paychecks any statements to influence the political opinions or actions of employees; or

·         Display any notice within 90 days before an election that attempts to influence employees to support (or not) a particular candidate by stating that if a candidate succeeds, there will be consequences in the workplace.

South Carolina Employers may not coerce any employee with respect to his political activity.
South Dakota Employers may not

·         Coerce any employee with respect to his political activity;

·         Include with employees’ paychecks any statements to influence the political opinions or actions of employees; or

·         Display any notice within 90 days before an election that attempts to influence employees to support (or not) a particular candidate by stating that if a candidate succeeds, there will be consequences in the workplace.

Tennessee Employers may not

·         Coerce any employee with respect to his political activity;

·         Distribute materials intended to coerce employees to vote in a certain way

Texas Employers may not coerce any employee with respect to his political activity.
Utah Employers may not

·         Coerce any employee with respect to his political activity;

·         Include with employees’ paychecks any statements to influence the political opinions or actions of employees; or

·         Display any notice within 90 days before an election that attempts to influence employees to support (or not) a particular candidate by stating that if a candidate succeeds, there will be consequences in the workplace.

Vermont Employers may not coerce any employee with respect to his political activity.
Virginia Employers may not

·         Require employees to donate money to political action committees as a condition of employment; or

·         Coerce any employee with respect to his political activity.

Washington Employers may not

·         Interfere with an employee’s efforts to support or oppose a political effort

·         Use payroll contributions or salary increases for the purposes of funding political activities; or

·         Coerce any employee with respect to his political activity.

Washington DC Employers may not coerce any employee with respect to his political activity.
West Virginia Employers may not

·         Require employees to donate money to political action committees as a condition of employment; or

·         Influence employees to support (or not) a particular candidate by stating that if a candidate succeeds, there will be consequences in the workplace.

Wisconsin Employers may not

·         Coerce any employee with respect to his political activity; or

·         Influence employees to support (or not) a particular candidate by stating that if a candidate succeeds, there will be consequences in the workplace.

Wyoming Employers may not coerce any employee with respect to his political activity.

 

Does Your State Require Voting Leave?

With the 2016 Election under three weeks away (Tuesday, November 8, 2016), employers should anticipate that employees will request time off to vote. Depending on the state, an employer may be required to provide voting leave to an employee.

The below table shows which states provide voting leave and which states do not.

No Voting Leave Provided Unpaid Voting Leave Paid Voting Leave
·         Connecticut ·         Alabama ·         Alaska
·         Delaware ·         Arkansas ·         Arizona
·         Florida ·         Georgia ·         California
·         Idaho ·         Kentucky ·         Colorado
·         Indiana ·         Massachusetts ·         Hawaii
·         Louisiana ·         Mississippi ·         Illinois
·         Maine ·         New Mexico ·         Iowa
·         Michigan ·         North Dakota ·         Kansas
·         Montana ·         Ohio ·         Maryland
·         New Hampshire ·         Wisconsin ·         Minnesota
·         New Jersey   ·         Missouri
·         North Carolina   ·         Nebraska
·         Oregon   ·         Nevada
·         Pennsylvania   ·         New York
·         Rhode Island   ·         Oklahoma
·         South Carolina   ·         South Dakota
·         Vermont   ·         Tennessee
·         Virginia   ·         Texas
·         Washington   ·         Utah
·         Washington DC   ·         West Virginia
    ·         Wyoming

In states where voting leave is required, state law dictates the conditions under which voting leave must be provided, if at all. The laws also set forth the amount of time that an employee must receive for this type of leave. As demonstrated above, depending on the state, the leave may be paid or unpaid.

It is recommended that all employers check the voting leave laws in their states prior to election day and provide training to managerial employees on compliance with this law.

Delaware Ends Compensation Secrecy Rules

A newly enacted Delaware law (the “Wage Secrecy” BillHB314) makes it illegal for Delaware employers to prohibit their employees from discussing their wages.

Specifically, this new law prohibits Delaware employers from

  1. Requiring nondisclosure of wages as a condition of employment and
  2. Firing or otherwise disciplining employees for sharing how much they make.

With this new law, Delaware joins several other states (California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, and Vermont) that have wage secrecy laws.

 

It is recommended that Delaware employers review their policies relating to worker compensation and eliminate any policy (or practice) that prohibits employees from discussing their wages.

Minimum Wage Mid-Year Check-Up

With various cities and counties enacting local minimum wages and 4 states increasing their own minimum wages this summer, employers should take time to verify that they are meeting the minimum wage requirements of their state/city/county.

The below chart sets forth the minimum wage effective July 1, 2016.

 

Federal $7.25
State City County  Amount?
Alabama  $7.25
Alaska  $9.75
Arizona  $8.05
Arkansas  $8.00
California — all cities/counties except …  $10.00
Berkeley Alameda County  $11.00
El Cerrito* Contra Costa County  $11.60
Emeryville* Alameda County
small employer (55 or less) $13.00
large employer (56 or more) $14.82
Long Beach* LA County $10.50
large employer (26 or more)
Los Angeles* LA County $10.50
large employer (26 or more)
Mountain View Santa Clara County $11.00
Oakland Alameda County $12.55
Palo Alto Santa Clara County $11.00
Pasadena* LA County $10.50
large employer (26 or more)
Richmond Contra Costa County $11.52
San Diego San Diego County $10.50
San Francisco* SF County $13.00
San Jose Santa Clara County $10.30
Santa Clara Santa Clara County $11.00
Santa Monica* LA County $10.50
large employer (26 or more)
Sunnyvale* Santa Clara County $11.00
Los Angeles County* $10.50
large employer (26 or more)
Colorado $8.31
Connecticut $9.60
Delaware $8.25
Florida $8.05
Georgia $7.25
Hawaii   $8.50
Idaho $7.25
Illinois — all cities/counties except … $8.25
Chicago* $10.50
Indiana $7.25
Iowa — all cities/counties except … $7.25
Johnson County $9.15
Kansas $7.25
Kentucky — all cities/counties except … $7.25
Lexington Lexington-Fayette County $8.20
Louisville $8.25
Louisiana $7.25
Maine — all cities/counties except … $7.50
Portland $10.10
Maryland* — all cities/counties except … $8.75
Montgomery County $9.55
Prince George’s County $9.55
Massachusetts $10.00
Michigan $8.50
Minnesota “small employers” (employers with an annual sales volume of less than $500,000) $7.25
“large employers” (employers with an annual sales volume of $500,000+) $9.00
increases 8/1/2016 “small employers” (employers with an annual sales volume of less than $500,000) $7.75
“large employers” (employers with an annual sales volume of $500,000+) $9.50
Mississippi $7.25
Missouri $7.65
Montana $8.05
Nebraska $9.00
Nevada $8.25
New Hampshire $7.25
New Jersey $8.38
New Mexico — all cities/counties except … $7.50
Albuquerque $8.75
Las Cruces $8.40
Santa Fe $10.91
Bernalillo County $8.65
Santa Fe County $10.91
New York $9.00
North Carolina $7.25
North Dakota $7.25
Ohio $8.10
Oklahoma $7.25
Oregon* — all cities/counties except … $9.75
Portland* $9.75
Nonurban Counties* (Baker, Coos, Crook, Curry, Douglas, Gilliam, Grant, Harney, Jefferson, Klmath, Lake, Malheur, Morrow, Sherman, Umatilla, Union, Wallowa Wheeler counties) $9.50
Pennsylvania $7.25
Rhode Island $9.60
South Carolina $7.25
South Dakota $8.55
Tennessee $7.25
Texas $7.25
Utah $7.25
Vermont $9.60
Virginia $7.25
Washington — all cities/counties except … $9.67
City of SeaTac (hospitality and transportation workers) $15.00
Seattle $12.00
small employer (500 or less)
large employer (501 or more) $13.00
Tacoma $10.35
Washington DC* $11.50
West Virginia $8.75
Wisconsin $7.25
Wyoming $7.25
 * = increase in minimum wage effective July 1, 2016

 

Caveat: Please be advised that this information is being provided as a courtesy and that ePlace Solutions, Inc. does not track local laws and ordinances and will not update this information with changes in local laws and ordinances.

 

Delaware Enacts New Social Media Policy

Effective as of August 7, 2015, Delaware employers are prohibited from engaging in the following activities:

  • Asking for an employees’ or applicant’s log-in information to a private social media account
  • Compelling an employee or applicant to accept a “friend” request
  • Forcing an employee or applicant to disable his or her account’s privacy setting.

An employer retains the right to monitor and control their own social media accounts.  Of course, employers should be mindful of disciplining employees for posts made on company accounts.  See our earlier post.

Delaware becomes the 22nd state to enact laws prohibiting such activities.  For further information, see the National Law Review article on the new law.