Category Archives: Minnesota

NEW LAW – St. Paul To Increase Minimum Wage to $15 Per Hour

Attention St. Paul employers, on November 14, 2018, Mayor Melvin Carter signed Ordinance 18-54 into law that will increase minimum wage to $15 per hour by between 2022 and 2027.

Under the new law, minimum wage in St. Paul will increase in accordance with the following schedule:

Employer Size Year Scheduled Increase
10,001+ employees January 1, 2020 $12.50
July 1, 2022 $15.00
101 to 10,000 employees July 1, 2020 $11.50
July 1, 2021 $12.50
July 1, 2022 $13.50
July 1, 2023 $15.00
6 to 100 July 1, 2020 $10.00
July 1, 2021 $11.00
July 1, 2022 $12.00
July 1, 2023 $13.00
July 1, 2024 $14.00
July 1, 2025 $15.00
5 or fewer July 1, 2020 $9.25
July 1, 2021 $10.00
July 1, 2022 $10.75
July 1, 2023 $11.50
July 1, 2024 $12.25
July 1, 2025 $13.25
July 1, 2026 $14.25
July 1, 2027 $15.00

 

NEW LAW – Minnesota’s Minimum Wage to Increase January 1, 2019

Minnesota employers, mark your calendars.  The Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry recently announced that on January 1, 2018, Minnesota’s minimum wage will increase as follows:

  • Large Employers – minimum wage will increase from $9.65 to $9.86 per hour
  • Small Employers – minimum wage will increase from $7.87 to $8.04 per hour.

For purposes of Minnesota’s minimum wage, the following definitions apply

  • A large employer is an employer with an annual gross sales volume of $500,000 or greater,
  • A small employer is one with an annual gross sales volume of less than $500,000.

The training wage that may be paid to employees 20 years old or younger for their first 90 consecutive days of employment, the youth minimum wage for employees younger than 18 years old, and the “J visa” rates will also increase from $7.87 to $8.04 per hour.

It is recommended that all Minnesota employers prepare for these increases.

Is The Minimum Pay Required For Commissioned Employees To Qualify For An Overtime Exemption Increasing In Your State In 2018?

While the minimum pay required for commissioned employees to qualify for an overtime exemption is not changing in 2018, there are several states where the minimum pay requirements for a “commissioned employee overtime exemption” are increasing.

These increases (i.e. in California, Colorado, Minnesota, Oregon, Washington, and Washington DC) are occurring because the pay an inside or commissioned salesperson must receive to qualify for the inside or “commissioned” sales exemption (as established under state law) are scheduled to increase in 2018 (December 31st for New York employers).

Under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), in order for a commissioned salesperson to qualify for the FLSA’s 7(i) overtime exception (Commissioned Salesperson Exemption), the following three conditions must be met:

  1. The employee must be employed by a retail or service establishment, and
  2. The employee’s regular rate of pay must exceed one and one-half times the applicable minimum wage for every hour worked in a workweek in which overtime hours are worked, and
  3. More than half the employee’s total earnings in a representative period must consist of commissions.

Unless all three conditions are met, the Commissioned Salesperson Exemption is not applicable, and overtime premium pay must be paid for all hours worked over 40 in a workweek at time and one-half the regular rate of pay.

The below table sets forth the changes to the minimum salary requirements for exempt employees in these states.  In those instances where the state minimum salary requirements are lower than the above-listed FLSA requirements, the higher salary threshold applies for employers who are subject to FLSA in order for employees to qualify for an exemption under the FLSA. Continue reading Is The Minimum Pay Required For Commissioned Employees To Qualify For An Overtime Exemption Increasing In Your State In 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 – Minnesota’s Minimum Wage to Increase January 1, 2018

Minnesota employers, mark your calendars.  The Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry recently announced that on January 1, 2018, Minnesota’s minimum wage will increase as follows:

  • Large Employers – minimum wage will increase from $9.50 to $9.65 per hour
  • Small Employers – minimum wage will increase from $7.75 to $7.87 per hour.

For purposes of Minnesota’s minimum wage, the following definitions apply

  • A large employer is an employer with an annual gross sales volume of $500,000 or greater,
  • A small employer is one with an annual gross sales volume of less than $500,000.

The training wage that may be paid to employees 20 years old or younger for their first 90 consecutive days of employment, the youth minimum wage for employees younger than 18 years old, and the “J visa” rates will also increase from $7.75 to $7.87 per hour.

It is recommended that all Minnesota employers prepare for these increases.

NEW LAW — Minneapolis Enacts New Minimum Wage Ordinance

Employers in Minneapolis beware.  The Minneapolis City Council recently approved a local minimum wage ordinance that will increase the minimum wage in Minneapolis to $15.00 by July 1, 2022 (for large employers) and by July 1, 2024 (for small employers).

Under this new ordinance, the minimum wage in Minneapolis is scheduled to increase as follows:

Large Employers (with at least 101 employees)
January 1, 2018 $10.00
July 1, 2018 $11.25
July 1, 2019 $12.25
July 1, 2020 $13.25
July 1, 2021 $14.25
July 1, 2022 $15.00
Small Employers (with 100 or fewer employees)
January 1, 2018 No increase
July 1, 2018 $10.25
July 1, 2019 $11.00
July 1, 2020 $11.75
July 1, 2021 $12.50
July 1, 2022 $13.50
July 1, 2023 $14.50
July 1, 2024 $15.00

Once minimum wage reaches $15.00, then minimum wage will be indexed to inflation.

For more information, please click here.

Minneapolis And Saint Paul Employers – Are You Prepared For The New Sick And Safe Leave Laws?

On July 1, 2017, the Minneapolis Sick and Safe Leave Ordinance and the Saint Paul Earned Sick and Safe Time Ordinance go into effect. For the time being, these laws will only be enforced against employers residing within these two cities. Is your business ready for the new law?

Minneapolis Sick and Safe Leave Ordinance

Under this law, all employers who reside in Minneapolis are required to provide employees with 48 hours of sick and safe time per year as follows:

  • Employers with 5 or fewer employees: the sick and safe time may be paid or unpaid (the employer can choose)
  • Employers with 6 or more employees: the sick and safe time must be paid

Sick and safe time may be provided to employees on an “up front” or “accrual” basis.

If an employer chooses to advance (“up front”) the sick and safe time, employers must provide all 48 hours of sick and safe time on July 1st or on an employee’s 90th day of employment. At the beginning of each subsequent calendar year, the employer must advance at least 80 hours of sick and safe time.

If employers choose to use the accrual method, then employees must accrue a minimum of one (1) hour of sick and safe time for every thirty (30) hours worked up to a maximum of forty-eight (48) hours in a calendar year. In addition, employees must be permitted to carry over accrued but unused sick and safe time into the following year until a cap of at least 80 hours is reached.

An employee may use her accrued sick and safe time hours to care for her own health or the health of a family member or member of household, or to address issues caused by domestic violence, sexual harassment, or stalking.

The Sick and Safe Time Ordinance required notice poster must be displayed where employees can easily read it in any/all languages needed by 5% or more of employees. The English version of the poster is available here and all other languages are available here.

Saint Paul Earned Sick and Safe Time Ordinance

Under this law, all employers who reside in Saint Paul are required to provide employees sick and safe time per year as follows:

  • Starting July 1, 2017 — employers with 24 or more employees must provide at least 48 hours of paid sick and safe time on either an “up front” or “accrual” basis.
  • Starting January 1, 2018 employers with 23 or fewer employees must provide at least 48 hours of paid sick and safe time on either an “up front” or “accrual” basis.

If an employer chooses to advance (“up front”) the sick and safe time, employers must provide all 48 hours of sick and safe time on July 1st or on an employee’s 90th day of employment. At the beginning of each subsequent calendar year, the employer must advance at least 80 hours of sick and safe time

If employers choose to use the accrual method, then employees must accrue a minimum of one (1) hour of sick and safe time for every thirty (30) hours worked up to a maximum of forty-eight (48) hours in a calendar year. In addition, employees must be permitted to carry over accrued but unused sick and safe time into the following year until a cap of at least 80 hours is reached.

An employee can use earned sick time for an absence resulting from

  • an employee’s own or an employee’s family member’s mental or physical illness, injury, or health condition;
  • to accommodate the employee’s or an employee’s family member’s need for medical diagnosis, care, or treatment of a mental or physical illness, injury, or health condition; or
  • an employee’s or an employee’s family member’s need for preventive medical care.
  • domestic abuse, sexual assault or stalking of the employee or employee’s family member

The Sick and Safe Time Ordinance required notice poster must be displayed where employees can easily read it. The English version of the poster is available here and all other languages are available here.

Take Home For Employers

The City of Minneapolis and the City of Saint Paul have provided guidance materials (preliminary rules, answers to frequently asked questions, workplace posters, and other resources) to help employers understand these new laws. It is recommended that all employers in these cities review these guidance materials.

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.

DOL Partnership regarding worker misclassification — 34 States and Counting

Thirty-five states have agreed to “team up” with the US Department of Labor to investigate worker misclassification. Is your state one of them?

In 2015, Department of Labor launched an initiative to combat the misclassification of employees as independent contractors. As a part of this initiative, the Department of Labor sought to partner with the state agencies and agree to share information and conduct joint investigations regarding independent contractor misclassification. To date, 35 states have entered into a memorandum of understanding regarding worker misclassification issues.

These states are:

  • Alabama
  • Alaska
  • Arkansas
  • California
  • Colorado
  • Connecticut
  • Florida
  • Hawaii
  • Idaho
  • Illinois
  • Iowa
  • Kentucky
  • Louisiana
  • Maryland
  • Massachusetts
  • Minnesota
  • Missouri
  • Montana
  • Nebraska
  • New Hampshire
  • New Mexico
  • New York
  • North Carolina
  • Oklahoma
  • Oregon
  • Pennsylvania
  • Rhode Island
  • South Dakota
  • Texas
  • Utah
  • Vermont
  • Virginia
  • Washington
  • Wisconsin
  • Wyoming

What does this mean for employers in these states?

Employers in the above-listed states should expect collaborative efforts between their state agencies and the Department of Labor during a investigation into potential employee misclassification as the state and the Department of Labor will share information. This could lead to simultaneous, multi-agency investigations into worker classification. It is recommended that companies have qualified legal counsel review any existing independent contractor arrangements. In addition, before entering into an independent contractor relationship, speak with an HR Professional or qualified legal counsel to verify that the worker truly is an independent contractor.