Everybody Should Know What a Job Pays

Everybody Should Know What a Job Pays

By V. James DeSimone

On September 27, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law Senate Bill (SB) 1162, which will require nearly 200,000 California companies with 15 or more employees to disclose pay ranges starting next year. What does it mean for job seekers? Besides providing them with critical information before they pursue a job opportunity, it gives potential employees some assurance that they will not face pay discrimination because of their age, race, ethnicity, gender or other characteristic. When pay ranges are disclosed, it informs job seekers where to focus their efforts and provides confidence that they will be paid as much as any other applicant for that same job. 

Even though the Equal Pay Act became U.S. law more than 50 years ago, pay disparities have been an ongoing blight on the American workplace. Pay disclosure laws could finally eliminate this blight. Such laws provide a host of important benefits, helping employers think through the value of the jobs they post while providing realistic expectations to those in the job market. Ultimately, requiring transparency of pay ranges could finally bring pay equity to the workplace where prior efforts have failed. It has been a long time coming. 

It’s a well-known fact that women earn a lot less than men. For the year 2021 it was about 83% of what their male colleagues made, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. As alarming as that sounds, it’s nothing compared to how Black and Latino women have fared. The 2022 Equal Pay Day for Black women was September 21, meaning they had to work an extra 263 days to earn what White men earned in 2021.

The causes and reasons for pay disparities have been studied and documented at length. In some companies, women have been undervalued, relegated to subservient roles, and denied status in the workplace. Oftentimes, pay disparities are due to overt discrimination. And laws mandating equal pay – on the books in every state, as well as at the national level – will keep failing to close the gap as long as attitudes are unchanged and legal remedies are anemic. 

But greater pay transparency could be the cure to address some of these failures. It isn’t rocket science, and it doesn’t require complicated economic calculations. If every company were to simply post the pay range for the jobs they sought to fill, the gap would actually begin to narrow. Laws to this effect have already been implemented, and data shows that the gender gap can move in the direction of closure as a result. According to the National Women’s Law Center, “Revealing a position’s salary range is an important negotiation prompt and provides some brake on pay discrimination in initial offers.”

Colorado adopted the first such law in 2021, requiring employers to include pay ranges in job postings. Early research shows that the law actually boosted labor force participation by 1.5%. In other words, Colorado employers had an easier time filling jobs because applicants felt better about applying for positions where the pay range was disclosed. This is no surprise given that 98% of all workers believe that employers should disclose salary information in job listings and more than half would refuse to even apply for a job if the salary range is not disclosed, according to a recent survey

With a growing number of states enacting pay range disclosure laws, the results should be significant. In its letter supporting SB 1162, California’s pay range disclosure law, CELA and other advocacy groups stated as follows: “Research shows that when job applicants are clearly informed about the context for negotiations, including the salary range, women are more willing to negotiate, more successful in negotiating, and the gender wage gap narrows.”

All workers could be impacted by these laws. For multistate employers, we can expect to see pay ranges posted for all positions, regardless of where the worker resides. In addition, under SB 1162 employers will not only have to disclose pay ranges for new hires, but also for current employees who request the pay range for their own position. Armed with more pay information for the same or similar roles, this new law could provide current employees with a legitimate basis for negotiating higher pay for themselves.

Ultimately, these pay transparency laws should be a game-changer for closing wage gaps within companies. This is good for workers and good for employers – when employees know they are being treated fairly, morale and productivity rises, which are key factors in retaining employees who do a good job.

About V. James DeSimone

Civil rights attorney V. James DeSimone, of V. James DeSimone Law of Marina del Rey, has dedicated his 36-year law career to providing vigorous and ethical representation to achieve justice for those whose civil and constitutional rights are violated. His team represents individuals and families in employment, police misconduct, school abuse, and personal injury cases. You can find out more about their work at www.vjamesdesimonelaw.com

A Closer Look at Algorithmic Bias and Employment: What You Need to Know Ahead of Friday’s Public Hearing

A Closer Look at Algorithmic Bias and Employment: What You Need to Know Ahead of Friday’s Public Hearing

By Ken Wang

With the economy opening back up and a post-pandemic hiring boom around the corner, more and more employers will be turning to artificial intelligence (AI) and algorithms to save costs and streamline hiring and recruitment. Massive data collection, machine learning, and other advanced computational techniques are transforming traditional pre-employment assessments to help employers assess the skills, aptitude, and fit of prospective workers.

So, what do these new technologies mean for workers?

To explore this question, the Department of Fair Employment and Housing will be hosting the first-ever virtual public hearing on algorithms and bias this Friday, April 30th. The hearing will be from 10:00 AM – 3:00 PM PST, with the employment section from 10:00 AM – 11:40 AM. You can RSVP using this link and tune in via Zoom

As employers increasingly move to automating hiring and other HR functions, it is imperative that we explore the growing role of algorithms in the workplace and assess whether our existing labor and employment laws are adequately protecting workers’ rights. For example, websites like Facebook use a vast amount of user information to target ads to a precise audience. Unlike the traditional paper ads placed in the classified section, accessible to all those who pick up the paper, the new world of micro-targeting means you only see opportunities that are targeted to you. Facebook’s “Affinity Group” feature categorizes users based on interests and demographics, allowing advertisers to precisely target their desired audience. This can be used to limit ad delivery to specific age bands, such as those from ages 18-38. 

Consider Facebook’s “Lookalike Audience” feature, which allows the ad buyer to import a “sample audience,” using a variety of data points that includes demographics information, from which Facebook can generate a target ad audience that “looks like” that sample. When used in the employment context, a sample audience with skewed demographics — such as a tech firm with overwhelmingly white, young, and male staff — will result in a target ad audience that is similarly skewed. 

You’d be right to wonder how these features could possibly withstand scrutiny under our anti-discrimination laws. In 2019, Facebook settled a lawsuit brought by national civil rights groups and agreed to make significant changes to the way these features are used for housing, employment, and credit ads.

These Facebook features present obvious issues, but other forms of algorithmic hiring tools can make discrimination virtually impossible to detect. Our friends at Upturn have done a nice overview of the kinds of tools being deployed in each step of the “hiring funnel” — the process by which prospective applicants turn into new hires. Here are a few examples at each stage:

  • At the “screening” stage:
    • Employers may use employee assessment tools to measure the skill, personality, or other traits of applicants. For example, the tool asks applicants to play games to measure traits such as processing speed, memory, and perseverance. The data is used to predict and rank who is the best match with the best performers of the employer’s workforce. 
    • This means that the applicants that are selected to advance will likely mirror the existing workplace demographics.
  • At the “interviewing” stage:
    • Employers may record an applicant’s interview using technology capable of facial recognition. Verbal responses, tone, and facial expressions are recorded to analyze word choice, enthusiasm, and other criteria in order to predict future job performance. 
    • This means that applicants who do not speak English as a first language may perform poorly.
  • At the “selection” stage:
    • Employers may use automated background check tools that trawl for information online in order to flag potential risks in hiring an applicant. For example, a tool can automatically analyze an applicant’s social media history to determine the likelihood of that person to engage in toxic behavior. The tool may also surface information that reveals information that is otherwise protected from disclosure
    • This means that an otherwise qualified applicant may be denied a job because a tool misinterpreted a previous social media post or revealed information about private health information.

These are just a few examples of how AI and algorithms have been used in the employment context. What’s clear is that there is so much more that we don’t know and we hope that Friday’s hearing is the first of many to explore this important topic. As worker advocates, we must ensure that our state agencies are staying engaged on these issues and that our employment laws are developing in a way that keeps pace with these evolving technologies. In addition to Friday’s hearing, you can also view an issue briefing CELA recently co-hosted on this same topic here

About Ken Wang, Esq.

Legislative Policy Associate, California Employment Lawyers Association

How to Access Paid Time Off When Caring for Loved Ones with COVID-19

This video, from CELA member Erin Pulaski, provides legal information about receiving paid time off if you need to care for a loved one experiencing symptoms of the new coronavirus.
To help workers struggling during the COVID-19 crisis, the California Employment Lawyers Association (CELA) is creating a series of videos explaining workplace rights and resources. We want California residents to understand their options.

About Erin Pulaski

Erin Pulaski has been consistently recognized for her advocacy on behalf of employees and executives. From 2015 to 2019, she was named one of the Top Women Attorneys in Northern California by San Francisco Magazine and recognized as a Super Lawyers “Rising Star” (a distinction given to no more than 2.5% of lawyers in the state). She has achieved the highest possible rating of “Superb” on Avvo.
Erin represents employees and executives in all aspects of employment litigation, including wrongful termination, discrimination, retaliation, harassment, wage and hour, and unpaid commission claims. She represents clients in both state and federal court, in arbitration, and through trial and appeals. She also handles confidential prelitigation negotiations on behalf of clients. Read more: https://rezlaw.com/erin-pulaski/

COVID-19 and the Right to a Safe Workplace

COVID-19 and the Right to a Safe Workplace

This past week, nurses at UCLA’s Santa Monica Hospital protested publicly for not receiving adequate personal protective equipment (PPE). Similar protests have been popping up all around the country as front-line workers demand that employers take appropriate measures to keep them healthy and safe. Already, too many workers have needlessly and tragically lost their lives in the line of duty.  While the COVID-19 pandemic has presented unique and significant challenges for employers to provide their employees with a safe workplace, they need to be doing more.

Common sense and compassion for people providing vital services should lead to companies doing everything they can to provide necessary protections for the safety of their employees during this unprecedented time. If the moral imperative is not enough, employers should know they have a legal obligation to do so. 

California Labor Code Section 6401 states: “Every employer shall furnish and use safety devices and safeguards, … which are reasonably adequate to render such employment and place of employment safe and healthful.  Every employer shall do every other thing reasonably necessary to protect the life, safety, and health of employees.”

Given what we know about the new coronavirus, providing masks, gloves, soap, and sanitizing products should be mandatory for employers whose employees have to come into contact with the public. Yet there are countless stories of front-line workers being denied these necessary precautions. In a recent Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request by The Washington Post, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration reported there were over 3,000 coronavirus-related complaints filed from January through early April. That number does not even include all of the complaints filed with state agencies, like California’s Cal/OSHA, which is similarly inundated with employee complaints.

Besides health and safety equipment and protocols, what about employees, many in vulnerable positions based on health considerations and the virus threat, who request to work remotely? 

Here, state law also offers some protection. If an employee has a disability that would make that employee more vulnerable to the virus and requests an accommodation to work at home, refusal to do so could violate California’s Fair Employment & Housing Act (FEHA).  Similarly, if an employee lives with someone who has a disability that makes them more vulnerable to the virus, the employee should request an accommodation to work at home in order to minimize the risk to the person they live with. Refusal to grant the request could violate the FEHA because an employee who is “associated with” a person with a disability also has accommodation rights. 

Importantly, an employer must also reimburse an employee for any expenses incurred by the employee to obtain necessary safety equipment or to otherwise keep themselves safe (yes, that protective equipment made from store bought swim goggles and trash bags is reimbursable). Even lodging costs may be reimbursable under state law if an employee is forced to self-isolate away from home because they live with someone who has the virus or is vulnerable to the virus.

If an employee requests safety equipment, safer working conditions or safety accommodations, including working at home, and the employer retaliates by terminating the employee, suspending them, or imposing another hardship, the employee may have legal recourse. Threats, intimidation or coercion to require any employee to take unreasonable safety risks, including the threat of termination, can constitute a violation of Civil Code § 52.1, which prohibits persons from interfering, or attempting to interfere, by threat, intimidation, or coercion, with the exercise or enjoyment of rights secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States or California. California Labor Code §§ 6310 and 6311 make it unlawful to retaliate because of safety or health complaints and protect employees who refuse to perform hazardous job duties. Health and Safety Code § 1278.5 also specifically prohibits retaliation against health care whistle-blowers. 

The legal consequences of those protective measures make it even more imperative that companies adhere to their obligation to provide safe workplaces.  For those employers that do not take that obligation seriously or, worse, retaliate against their employees, California law provides robust protection. If workers continue to face unsafe working conditions or retaliatory conduct, they should exercise their legal rights and consult with an employment lawyer.   

In this new reality, we understand businesses are facing immense pressure, but they must remember – workers’ lives are at stake. Now is the time for businesses to rise up to the challenge and do everything reasonably necessary to protect their employees. 

About V. James DeSimone

Civil rights attorney V. James DeSimone, of V. James DeSimone Law of Marina del Rey, has dedicated his 36-year law career to providing vigorous and ethical representation to achieve justice for those whose civil and constitutional rights are violated. His team represents individuals and families in employment, police misconduct, school abuse, and personal injury cases. You can find out more about their work at www.vjamesdesimonelaw.com

Know Your Rights: California Health Insurance Options After Job Loss

This video, from CELA member Ella Hushagen, provides legal information about your health insurance options following a job loss.

To help workers struggling during the COVID-19 crisis, the California Employment Lawyers Association (CELA) is creating a series of videos explaining workplace rights and resources. We want California residents to understand their options.

About Ella Hushagen

Ella Hushagen is a member of CELA and an attorney with Teukolsky Law. She graduated cum laude from Occidental College in 2004, and pursued a career in health care access before attending law school. She graduated from UCLA School of Law in 2013 (J.D.), and simultaneously received a Masters Degree in Public Health. In law school, Ms. Hushagen specialized in public interest legal advocacy as a participant in the prestigious Epstein Public Interest Law Program. She met Ms. Teukolsky after her second year of law school while serving as a law clerk at Traber & Voorhees, one of the premier civil rights firms in California. After graduating, Ms. Hushagen served as a law clerk to the Honorable Fernando M. Olguin at the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

6 Tips for Covering Expenses While Working From Home During COVID-19

This video, from CELA member Lauren Teukolsky, provides legal information about expenses incurred while working from home for your employer.

To help workers struggling during the COVID-19 crisis, the California Employment Lawyers Association (CELA) is creating a series of videos explaining workplace rights and resources. We want California residents to understand their options.

About Lauren Teukolsky

Lauren Teukolsky launched Teukolsky Law in 2017 after practicing law for 17 years at some of California's most prestigious civil rights law firms and organizations. A cum laude graduate of Harvard College (B.A.), Ms. Teukolsky graduated in the top 10 of her class at UCLA School of Law (J.D.), where she was an Articles Editor for the UCLA Law Review and won the law school's Read More https://www.teuklaw.com/lauren-teukolsky.html

9 Financial Benefits for California Parents Losing Wages Due to COVID-19

To help workers struggling during the COVID-19 crisis, the California Employment Lawyers Association (CELA) is creating a series of videos explaining workplace rights and resources. We want California residents to understand their options. This video, from CELA member Nina Baumler, provides legal information about parental rights in relation to school closures during this emergency.

About Nina Baumler

Originally from England, Nina Baumler is a wage and hour attorney in Los Angeles, California. In her solo practice, Ms. Baumler represents low-wage workers in some of the most vulnerable sectors of the workforce, including car-wash workers, janitors, caregivers, restaurant workers, security guards, truck drivers and other low-wage economies. Ms. Baumler regularly co-counsels with non-profit organizations in wage and hour and fraudulent transfer/successor liability cases and is an advisory board member of The Wage Justice Center.

UPDATE III: A Roundup of California Worker Rights in the Time of COVID-19

UPDATE III: A Roundup of California Worker Rights in the Time of COVID-19

By Andy Katz. UPDATED: March 27, 2020 with more details on new unemployment insurance benefits (incl. from the federal stimulus bill); health insurance for furloughed or laid off workers; tax credits; which jobs are deemed essential; and more.

As COVID-19 spreads, many workers are considering how to protect themselves and their families – while worrying about their work and budgets.

At the time this blog post was last updated (March 27, 2020) the rapid pace of the pandemic has advanced from calls for maximizing social distancing in the general population to mandatory “shelter in place” orders to prevent further spread.  On March 19, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-33-20, mandating all residents to stay at home “except as needed to maintain continuity of operations of the federal infrastructure sectors.”  The Order is in effect until further notice. 

The California Department of Public Health had previously issued “social distancing” recommendations and other guidance to protect public health, urging vulnerable populations including people who are 65 years or older, in addition to people with certain health conditions such as heart disease, lung disease, diabetes, kidney disease, and weakened immune systems.  Several County Public Health Departments, including Alameda, Contra Costa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, and Sonoma Counties also include people who are 60 years or older within vulnerable populations.  A UCSF Expert Panel advised: “Anyone over 60 stay at home unless it’s critical.”

Assessment of what workers should do to be safe, and the role they could play in helping slow the spread of the virus is beyond the scope of an article about legal rights. However, it is clear from recent advisories that workers have legitimate reasons for concern. Many people want to heed the call of public-health experts to stay home out of concern for the heightened risk of severe complications for vulnerable populations. Understanding how current laws may protect them is critical information to have as workers weigh these important decisions and advocate with their employers for what they need. This post provides an overview of where workers stand as of today, bearing in mind that many advocacy groups, including CELA (California Employment Lawyers Association) and its national counterpart, NELA, are pressing Congress and the California legislature to offer even more protection and much-needed relief to California workers as they try to make the choices that are best for themselves, their families, and society at large. Read on for important answers to frequently asked questions about California workers’ rights in the time of COVID-19.

I’M LOSING WAGES. WHAT WILL HELP?

California Workers Can Apply for Wage Replacement for Disability and Reduced Work Hours

Two state-run programs are available for employees in need of wage replacement during a “Shelter in Place” order, and to support social distancing for their health and safety – Unemployment Insurance (UI) and State Disability Insurance (SDI), both administered by the Employment Development Department (EDD). Governor Newsom’s Executive Order waived the usual one-week waiting period for people who are unemployed and/or disabled as a result of COVID-19.

If an employer closes the workplace due to COVID-19, including as a result of a “Shelter in Place” order, and doesn’t pay or only partially pays its employees, workers can apply for Unemployment Insurance (UI) or, if eligible, SDI. Unemployment Insurance benefits cover approximately 50 percent of wages, up to a maximum of $450 per week, which is taxable.  The Federal CARES Act adds $600 to each weekly benefit check, extends the maximum weeks of UI benefits from 26 weeks to 39 weeks, and allows retroactive payment of benefits for income loss beginning January 27, 2020.  The Act also provides advance payments of a tax credit to taxpayers of $1,200 per adult plus $500 per child.  These tax credits phase out for individuals earning $75,000 – $99,000 or couples earning $150,000 – $198,000. 

The EDD has outlined how self-employed, independent contractors can qualify for UI. State Disability Insurance is only available for independent contractors who have enrolled in Elective Coverage. Workers are often misclassified as independent contractors, and may have the same rights to benefits as employees under AB 5, even if their employer calls them an “independent contractor.”  The CARES Act specifically extends Pandemic Unemployment Assistance to self-employed individuals for up to 39 weeks of lost income between January 27 and December 31, 2020. 

State Disability Insurance eligibility defines disability to include any illness or injury preventing regular or customary work. Benefits cover 60-70 percent of wages up to a maximum of $1,300 per week for up to 52 weeks, and are tax-exempt. A worker must be unable to work for at least eight days, and must submit medical certification by a health practitioner prior to issuance of benefits. Electronic certification options are available for health practitioners.  Applications may be submitted within 49 days of the first date they had to stop working because of disability.

While the EDD hasn’t yet confirmed that applications citing only age-related vulnerabilities will be approved, they have confirmed that people who cannot work due to “having or being exposed” to COVID-19, if certified by a medical professional, can file a Disability Insurance claim.

Older workers who are in an age-defined vulnerable population and who obtain medical certification of their age-related condition as an “illness” may also be eligible for disability benefits, although there is no certain answer to this question yet. When doctors or other healthcare providers are filling in the disability forms, they should consider using “R54,” the International Classification of Diseases code for “age-related physical debility” when there isn’t a more specific condition.

EDD also administers Paid Family Leave (PFL) benefits, allowing up to six weeks of PFL at the SDI rate to Californians who are unable to work because they are caring for an ill or quarantined family member with COVID-19, if certified by a medical professional.

WHAT IF I’M LOSING MY HEALTH INSURANCE DUE TO BEING FURLOUGHED OR LAID OFF?

The Federal and California COBRA laws require employers with at least two employees to offer continuation of the employer-sponsored health plan for up to 36 months at the same monthly rate the employer paid for the premium.  Laid off employees can also choose to enroll in a health plan offered through Covered California, where subsidies available under the Affordable Care Act may offer less expensive coverage than the employer’s COBRA plan.  The Special Enrollment Period to enroll in a plan through Covered California lasts 60 days from losing job-based coverage.  Due to the emergency, special enrollment is open for all Californians until June 30, 2020

WHAT IF MY CHILD’S SCHOOL IS CLOSED BECAUSE OF CORONAVIRUS?

Federal Response, California School Emergency Leave and Unemployment Benefits May Help Some Workers

If you miss work to care for your child after their school closes, you may be eligible for Unemployment Insurance. The Employment Development Department is handling school closure applications on a case-by-case basis, and encouraging claims for partial benefits where the employer is allowing reduced hours, but has not yet clarified whether the usual requirements of being available for work will be waived where the employer does not allow reduced hours. Employees should apply right away since the usual 7-day waiting period for benefits has been waived due to COVID-19.

Once the ‘Families First’ Coronavirus Response Act goes into effect April 1, employees who have worked for a covered employer more than 30 days will be eligible for twelve weeks of leave, paid at two-thirds of regular pay, up to a maximum of $200 per day or $10,000 total. 

Also, under California’s Labor Code, employers with 25 or more employees working at the same location must allow employees to take up to 40 hours of leave per year to address an emergency at a child’s day care or school. However, an employee must still notify the employer in advance.

WHAT IF I GET SICK, OR I NEED TO CARE FOR FAMILY?

State and Local Sick or Medical Leave Laws Offer Protection

Employees who are sick can take accrued paid sick days. How many sick days are available depends on employer policies, although California requires employers to provide minimally three days of paid sick leave and some cities require even more. Employees who work for employers of 50 or more people have more rights and may be eligible for up to twelve weeks of unpaid time off. Employees sent home but are asked to work must be compensated for that work without loss of sick leave.

The Healthy Workplaces, Healthy Families Act of 2014 (Lab. Code §§ 245-249, 2810.5) requires all California employers to provide eligible employees at least three days of paid sick leave. Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, Santa Monica, Oakland, Berkeley, and Emeryville also have local ordinances requiring as much as six or nine days of sick leave per year.

Employers who retaliate against employees for taking sick leave that is required by law risk liability for wrongful termination lawsuits. What is clear is that the legally-required amounts of sick leave aren’t enough, especially if a worker is trying to get through a 14-day quarantine, or faces uncertainty with vulnerable members of their household. Workers who are often misclassified as independent contractors have the same rights to sick leave as employees under AB 5, even if their employer calls them an “independent contractor.” Misclassified employees can file claims in court or at the Department of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE).  

For people who work for an employer with at least 50 employees within 75 miles of their worksite, California law requires employers to provide twelve weeks of job-protected leave each year under the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) or the California Family Rights Act (CFRA) for a “serious health condition” of the employee or a member of their family. To qualify for this leave, the employee must have worked for the employer for at least one year total during their lifetime and have worked at least 1,250 hours in the last calendar year. So, if an employee or family member contracts COVID-19, they are likely to be protected by the medical leave laws. These laws may also protect individuals with compromised immune systems if a doctor takes them off work because they or a family member suffer from a chronic condition.

It’s important to understand that FMLA and CFRA leave is unpaid (although State Disability Insurance may be available).

Additionally, on March 18th, Congress passed the ‘Families First’ Coronavirus Response Act to provide emergency paid sick leave and emergency paid family leave (read more about this new law here). 

WHAT IF I’M VULNERABLE TO COVID-19?

California’s Disability Rights Law Provides for Reasonable Accommodation

The law requires employers to consider offering work-from-home or medical leaves of absence as a reasonable accommodation under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) for people who qualify as having a disability under the law. This is a case-by-case analysis, but employees with compromised immune systems or who are medically at risk should assert their rights and request the accommodations they need to remain safe.  

California employers with at least 5 employees are required to provide reasonable accommodations, unless they are able to meet a very high standard to prove that doing so would cause an undue hardship.

Legal Aid at Work has a very helpful guide on how to request a reasonable accommodation. The best practice is to submit written documentation of the disability and the need for the accommodation, including a doctor’s note. If that’s not possible given the impacted healthcare system, employees can explain their need for accommodations to their employer and refer to publicly-available information to justify the need for reasonable accommodation.

For instance, the California Department of Public Heath urges high-risk individuals to “stay home as much as possible,” and the San Francisco Department of Public Health urges workers to “telecommute if possible,” and “avoid contact with people who are sick.”

The extraordinary conditions and risks of COVID-19 will broaden the range of employees who qualify for reasonable accommodations under FEHA. Disability under FEHA is broadly construed to mean a physical disability, including a condition that affects the immunological system and limits a major life activity. The law already recognizes that “major life activities” include interacting with others, working, and major functions of the immune system. There is an exception that refers to the common cold and common flu, but there is nothing common about COVID-19, so that exception should not apply.  

The goal of reasonable accommodations is to keep the employee working (and earning a paycheck). So the first possibility to consider is telecommuting. Telecommuting is a reasonable accommodation where it allows the employee to continue to perform the essential functions of their job. For employees who can work via computer, video-conferencing and phone, this is an ideal choice. Employers can refuse this accommodation if letting the employee telecommute imposes an undue hardship on the employer’s operations.  

If a job cannot be done remotely, a last-resort accommodation is a leave of absence, which is an option under the law where “the leave is likely to be effective in allowing the employee to return to work at the end of the leave, with or without further reasonable accommodation, and does not create an undue hardship for the employer.”

Employers cannot have blanket policies refusing telecommuting or medical leaves (or any other possible accommodation). Instead, employers must engage in a good faith interactive process to find an effective reasonable accommodation.

Discrimination or retaliation against a person with a disability, including disciplining them, treating them differently than other workers or terminating them is prohibited under California law. This protection extends to people who the employer assumes or “regards” as a person with a disability. While employers can require medical documentation of a disability and the employee’s limitations, they cannot force employees to disclose a specific health condition or disability.

Federal employees are not covered under California law, but are covered under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Rehabilitation Act.  The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has developed guidance for COVID-19 here

WHAT IF SOMEONE I LIVE WITH IS VULNERABLE TO COVID-19?

The California Family Rights Act (CFRA), discussed above, requires twelve weeks of job-protected leave for covered employees caring for a “serious health condition” of a family member.  Up to six weeks of Paid Family Leave (PFL) benefits are available through the EDD. 

Employees are also protected under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) from discrimination or retaliation, such as harassment or wrongful termination, due to a known relationship or association with someone with a known disability.  This includes making a request for a reasonable accommodation, whether that request is granted or not.  While no court has ruled yet on the specific issue of whether an employer must grant an accommodation based on a family member’s disability, one Appellate Court considering this issue discussed the possibility that the law “may reasonably be interpreted to require accommodation based on the employee’s association with a physically disabled person.” 

It is highly recommended to review this type of complex situation with an attorney familiar with employment law. 

WHAT IF I AM OR COULD BE EXPOSED TO COVID-19 IN MY WORKPLACE?

Employer Illness and Injury Prevention Programs

In furtherance of its mission to ensure safe workplaces and enforcing requirements for all employers to have an Injury and Illness Prevention Program, Cal/OSHA has issued Interim Guidelines for General Industry and other specific industries, like childcare providers and health-care workers, from COVID-19. These guidelines include actively encouraging sick employees to stay home, sending employees with acute respiratory symptoms home immediately, and preparing an outbreak response plan in the event of an outbreak.

State disability and medical privacy laws generally prevent an employer from asking an employee about their medical conditions.  However, employers can ask for a medical examination or about disability issues if there is a reasonable belief, based on objective evidence, that an employee’s ability to perform essential job functions will be impaired by a medical condition, or that a medical condition will pose a direct threat.  For example, if an employee confirms to an employer they have COVID-19, the employer should identify everyone the infected employee was in contact with during the CDC-identified 14-day period, notify the identified individuals of possible exposure, and could consider sending the exposed employees home for 14 days.  Employers may not disclose the names or personal information of the employee who tested positive. 

For an employee who is concerned about workplace safety, “internal” whistle-blowing is a protected activity when a complaint is made to a manager that identifies facts that could violate Cal/OSHA requirements.  For more serious situations, formal complaints can be filed with Cal/OSHA, and written documentation could assist if the employer disputes that internal whistle-blowing occurred.

An employee may also refuse to perform work that would result in a Cal/OSHA violation that creates a real and apparent hazard to the employee or their coworkers, and may seek back pay for lost wages.  More information on workplace safety standards is available from WorkSafe, a nonprofit research and advocacy organization.  These situations are complex, and consultation with an attorney is highly recommended, because an employer can take the position that an undocumented failure to go to work is a non-retaliatory business reason to terminate employment. 

IS MY JOB REALLY ESSENTIAL?

The State Public Health Officer has issued a list of “Essential Critical Infrastructure Workers.” Disability accommodation and workplace safety requirements still apply when performing essential work.  Determinations of which precise businesses and functions are deemed “essential” are made by the California Department of Public Health and County Health Officers, and in some cases local police departments have closed non-essential workplaces.

Worker’s Compensation

Employers are responsible to provide compensation through the worker’s compensation system for injuries arising in the course of employment.

An injured worker who was exposed to and contracted COVID-19 at or through their work can make a claim by completing DWC1 form and sending it to their employer.

Any workplace exposure must be a significant contributing factor to an employee’s injury for a claim to be compensable. Employers frequently dispute whether an injury is work-related. Those disputes are typically resolved by the Worker’s Compensation Appeals Board based on the medical report of a Panel Qualified Medical Examiner appointed by the Division of Worker’s Compensation, likely a specialist in Immunology or Internal Medicine.

If the claim is approved, benefits include temporary disability wage replacement, medical care, and compensation for permanent impairment. Unfortunately, misclassified independent contractors who are employees under the new “ABC Test” of AB 5 (2019) are not eligible for worker’s compensation until July 1, 2020.

More Protections Needed During this Public Health Emergency

Additional protections are needed during this public health emergency. California Governor Gavin Newsom, members of the California Legislature, and the United States Congress have announced plans to introduce legislation that may further protect workers subject to an isolation or quarantine order by a health official from discrimination or retaliation, or offer better wage replacement for people who are in quarantine or caring for family members.  Stay tuned to this post for ongoing updates.

For more information on COVID-19:

Review of Families First Coronavirus Response Act

California COVID-19 Home Page

California Department of Public Health

California Labor & Workforce Development Agency FAQs

LWDA Summary Chart of Benefits

Employment Development Department Coronavirus FAQs

Department of Labor Standards Enforcement FAQs

Department of Fair Employment and Housing Regulations

Legal Aid at Work FAQs – EnglishSpanishChinese

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Guidance about the ADA and COVID-19

WorkSafe Coronavirus Updates

UCLA Law Library COVID-19 Reference List

About Andy Katz

Andy Katz is the principal of Law Offices of Andy Katz, fighting for workers' rights, consumers, and environmental protection. His law practice focuses on workplace discrimination and retaliation, wage theft, workers’ compensation, and health and disability insurance denials. He previously advocated for public health issues before the California legislature. He is a member of the California Employment Lawyers Association (CELA). Web: www.andykatzlaw.com

Pregnancy and Parental Leave Rights in California in the Time of COVID-19

Pregnancy and Parental Leave Rights in California in the Time of COVID-19
Adobe Stock

By Sarah Schlehr

Worries about job security and remaining healthy at work are heightened for pregnant moms and new parents during the COVID-19 pandemic. While it is a public health emergency, not all employers are taking the same steps in how they alter business, leaving uncertainty for some employees.  Here we answer frequent questions about parental leave for California employees in the midst of the outbreak

Q. Can I demand to work remotely if I’m afraid of getting the new coronavirus in the workplace?

A. Under California’s Pregnancy Disability Leave law, if you work for an employer with at least 5 employees, you are entitled to reasonable accommodations for a condition related to pregnancy, childbirth, or a related medical condition. If your health care provider advises that you need to work remotely to protect your health or pregnancy and you can perform the essential functions of your job, your employer will need to grant your request. If you are unable to perform the essential functions of your job remotely, then your employer does not need to accommodate your request but will be required to either temporarily transfer you to a position that will permit you to work remotely for the time you are affected by pregnancy or provide you with a job-protected leave of absence.

Following Governor Newsom’s March 19, 2020 “Stay at Home” Executive Order, many employers are taking steps to facilitate remote work. If your employer already has put measures in place for employees to work from home, you may request the same accommodation if those measures can be applied to your job.

Q. Can I take a leave of absence during my pregnancy if I’m afraid of getting COVID-19?  

A.  During the time of COVID-19, pregnant women may be advised by their doctor to work remotely or, if this is not possible, to take a leave of absence. If your doctor recommends that you take a leave of absence because you are disabled by pregnancy, childbirth, or a related medical condition, you are entitled to up to four months of job-protected leave.  If your pregnancy-related disability extends longer than four months, you may be entitled to more than four months of leave as a reasonable accommodation.  

Q. My doctor placed me on a leave of absence because my employer would not allow me to work remotely. My employer has now moved everyone to remote work. Can I begin working again?

A. Yes. If your employer decides to implement remote work protocols, your employer must reinstate you as soon as reasonable accommodations are available that will permit you to perform the essential functions of your job.

Q. If I require a leave of absence for my pregnancy, does my employer have to pay me?

A. Under ordinary circumstances, if you are taking leave because you are disabled because of pregnancy or to bond with your new baby, your employer does not need to pay you while you are on leave. However, you can use any sick and vacation leave you have accrued. Additionally, you may be eligible for State Disability Insurance (SDI) and Paid Family Leave (PFL) during this time, which would provide you with 60 or 70% of your normal weekly wages.  If you are taking leave under the Pregnancy Disability Leave Law, the New Parent Leave Act, or the California Family Right Act, then your employer must also maintain your health benefits.

If you work for an employer with 500 or fewer employees and your health care provider advises you to self-quarantine during your pregnancy due to concerns about COVID-19 or you are experiencing symptoms of COVID-19 and are seeking a medical diagnosis, then your employer may be required to pay you for 10 days for emergency sick leave under The Families First Coronavirus Response Act.

Q. Can I be laid off while I’m taking disability or parental leave?

A. Your employer cannot include you in a layoff if the reason for the layoff is that you are pregnant or taking a job-protected leave. However, your employer can include you in a layoff or reduction in force if you would have been laid off even if you weren’t pregnant or taking leave.

Q. What benefits can I receive if I’m on leave or laid off?

A. A variety of benefits may provide partial wage reimbursement if you are laid off during your pregnancy or taking a job-protected leave of absence. You can apply for these benefits through California’s Employment Development Department (EDD). Such partial wage replacement benefits may include:

Short term disability—during the time you are disabled because of pregnancy, childbirth, or a related medical condition, you may be entitled to short term disability benefits.

Paid family leave—if/when you are no longer disabled, you may be eligible for up to 6 weeks of Paid Family Leave benefits while you bond with your new baby (8 weeks starting July 1, 2020).  

Unemployment Insurance—when you are available to work but do not have a job to return to, you may be eligible for unemployment benefits.

Q. My child’s school/daycare closed due to COVID-19. Can I work from home?

A. There is no law that requires employers to permit employees to work from home because a child’s school or daycare has closed. However, the California Labor Code and the The Families First Coronavirus Response Act require your employer to provide you with time off of work.

California’s Family School Partnership Act requires employers with at least 25 employees to provide you with up to 40 hours of leave for a school or childcare related emergency. A school related emergency includes the closure or unexpected unavailability of your child’s school or childcare provider. Unfortunately, this provision does not apply if your child’s school or daycare remains open even if you would prefer to keep them home due to concerns of the new coronavirus.

The Families First Coronavirus Response Act requires employers with 500 or fewer employees to provide employees with 2 weeks of emergency paid sick leave and 12 weeks of emergency family leave when workers need to care for their child under 18 years old if the child’s school or place of care has been closed or when their childcare provider is unavailable.  For the 12 weeks of emergency family leave, you must have worked for your employer for at least 30 days. 

Q. What is a good approach for discussing my rights with my employer?

A. Be professional and patient without risking your health or the health of your pregnancy or child. It is important to ask your employer questions in a professional manner. If your employer doesn’t have immediate answers, give them the opportunity to obtain accurate information. But never risk your own health or the health of your pregnancy or child. If your doctor or other health care provider advises that you require accommodations or a leave of absence immediately, let your employer know in writing and follow your health care provider’s advice. If your employer requests a doctor’s note, provide one to them as soon as it’s feasible.

Benefits and protections available to employees impacted by COVID-19 are evolving and you are encouraged to check with the websites of the Labor and Workforce Development Agency and the Employment Development Department of California websites for the most updated information regarding your rights as an employee in California and the benefits that may be available to you. Also, visit Legal Aid at Work’s Roadmap and Guide to see how your right to leave and wage replacement work together. You may also contact Sarah Schlehr at sarah@pregnancylawyer.com if you have questions about your rights.

About Sarah Schlehr

Sarah B. Schlehr is the founder of The Schlehr Law Firm, P.C. Her firm focuses on representing employees who are discriminated against because of pregnancy or for taking a leave of absence. Her firm also represents veterans who have been discriminated against for taking military leave. She is a graduate of Harvard Law School, Brigham Young University, Gerry Spence’s Trial Lawyers College, and the Strauss Institutes’ Program on Mediating the Litigated Case.

新型冠状病毒 – 加州劳工法指南

新型冠状病毒 – 加州劳工法指南

Written by Andy Katz, Translated by Ken Wang

当新型冠状病毒疫情广泛传播之际,许多工薪阶层人士正在思考如何保护他们自己和家庭—同时忧虑他们的工作和财务状况。

正当这篇博文书写之际(2020年3月27日),为力延缓病毒的快速扩散,加州州长纽森(Newsom)已下令,除了关键基础设施部门的工作以外,所有居民应呆在家中。

加州公共卫生局已发布了关于社交间距的建议,敦促年龄在65岁或以上且存在某些健康问题的人士,为高危人群,例如,心脏病、肺病、糖尿病、肾病以及免疫系统脆弱等老年患者。加州地方卫生局,包括Alameda、Contra Costa、San Francisco、San Mateo、 Santa Clara、Santa Cruz 和Sonoma县,指定所有60岁以上的居民为高危人群。加州大学旧金山分校专家建议,“除非紧急情况,所有60岁以上人士应呆在家中。”

这篇博文提供了一个总括有关工人如今所享受的权利,以便大家能权衡工作上的重要决定并让工人了解向雇主提出他们的要求时所需的信息。牢记许多宣传小组,包括加州劳工法律联会(CELA)和美国劳工法律联会(NELA)正在推动国会和州立法会通过立法,所以情况可能迅速改变。以下是有关加州工人在新冠疫情期间劳工权益的问题的重要回复。

失去了工资,如何求助?

如果加州工人因残障或减少工时而失去工资,可以向政府申请工资替代

需要工资替代来支持社交距离和居留在家的雇员,加州有两种福利或许会有帮助——州残障保险(State Disability Insurance – “SDI”)和失业保险(Unemployment Insurance – “UI”),均由就业发展部(Employment Development Department – “EDD”)管理。纽森州长已颁布了特别行政令,对于那些因COVID-19失业或致残的人士,取消通常的一周等待周期。

如果雇主因为COVID-19而关闭工作场所(例如公共卫生令要求居民留在居所),并不出薪或只出一部分薪水,雇员可以申请UI或SDI。失业金代替50%的工资,高达每周$450,应税。最近通过的联邦紧急补救法案(CARES Act)增加了失业金补助。该法案在现有福利的基础上每周增加$600,延长福利领用期至39周(原26周),并且允许从1月27日算起的追溯福利。联邦法律并为每位纳税人提供$1,200的税收抵免和每个小孩$500。年收入$75,000 – $99,000 的人士(或年薪$150,000 – $198,000的夫妇)得到的税收抵免按照收入程度逐步减少。

EDD公布了针对自雇人士和独立承包商如何申请失业金的指引。SDI只适用于那些参加了选修保险的独立承包商。自从加州通过AB5法,被误归类为独立合同工的工人,即便被雇主称为独立合同工,也应享有UI和其他劳工权益。联邦CARES Act为自雇人士提供长达39周的收入损失,从2020年1月27日至12月31日。

SDI规定,任何妨碍工人进行日常工作的疾病或受伤都属于残障保护范围内,福利覆盖由60%-70%工资,至最多每周$1300,共52周,且豁免所得税。一个工人必须不能工作至少8天,且必须在申领福利前提交有医生证明。从因疾病或受伤而停止工作那一天算起,工人可在49天内向EDD申请SDI。

虽然EDD未能确认是否批准高危人群中的申请人引用年龄原因来申请SDI,他们确认那些由于“正在或将要暴露在”COVID-19的人士,并且可提供医学文件证明,则可完成SDI的申索。

高龄工人,指那些根据年龄属于高危人群,且获得与年龄条件相关的“疾病”的医疗证明,或许有资格申领残障福利,尽管目前还没有明确的答案。当医生或保健提供填制残障证明时,他们应该考虑使用“R54”条款,即疾病国际分类法中的“与年龄相关的体质虚弱”,当没有其它确切的症状。

除了残障保险以外,EDD还负责管理有薪家庭假(Paid Family Leave – “PFL”)福利。此福利允许那些因COVID-19照顾患病或隔离的家人而无法工作的州民。申请者必须提供医生证明。PFL提供的工资代替与SDI相同,但最多长达6周。

如果雇主因COVID-19关闭工作场所,包括由于政府居留在家令,并完全不付或只提供支付一部分雇员工资,则工人可以申领失业金,或,符合条件者可申领SDI。UI覆盖大约50%工资,最多至每周$450,应税。

如果孩子的学校因冠状病毒关闭该怎么办?

加州学校紧急假和失业救济(法)或许可以对某些工人提供帮助

如果因为学校关闭而要照顾孩子丢掉工作,你或许符合申领UI的条件。EDD正在对关校申请进行个案到个案的处理,并鼓励那些被雇主减少工时的工人申请UI。UI规定通常要求申请人必须有能力随时恢复工作,EDD尚未决定是否取消该条例。但UI通常的七天等待期已被取消,所以工人可以立即申请UI福利。

上周国会通过了《新型冠状病毒疫家庭保护法》,并在4月3日生效。该法律为工人提供长达12周的假期,高达2/3 的工资替代(最多每日$200,总额$10000)。法律要求有500员工以下得雇主必须提供该福利,但工人必须为该雇主工作起码30天。

加州劳工法也提供休假福利。在同一个工作场所雇佣25位工人以上的雇主必须为员工提供每年长达40小时的假期。该假期只能用于工人因处理孩子在学校或托儿所遇到的紧急情况而需要离开工作。诚然,雇员必须提前知会雇主。

当我得病或需要照顾家庭时?

加州和地方法律对生病或病假提供的保护

生病雇员可获得有薪病假。尽管加州要求雇主提供至少三天的有薪病假,有些城市规定的更多些。如何具体计算生病天数仍取决于雇主的规定。为50或更多雇主服务的雇员,或许有资格获得最长至12周的无薪假期。已回家但被要求工作的雇员,必须得到普通薪水获。在这种情况下,雇主不能扣员工所累积的病假。

2014年健康工作场所和健康家庭法案》规定所有加州雇主,向合资格雇员提供三天有薪病假。Los Angeles、San Diego、San Francisco、Santa Monica、Oakland、Berkeley、和Emeryville各有每年6至9天有薪病假的本地规定。

那些刁难告病假雇员的雇主,依法必须承担违规终止雇佣关系的法律责任。但法律保障的有薪病假依然不够,尤其是当雇员需要隔离14天,或必需面对家庭中高危成员的不确定因素。自从加州通过AB5法,被误归类为独立合同工的工人,也应享有与雇员同样的病假权利,即便被雇主称为独立合同工。被不当分类的雇员,可向法庭或加州劳工部(Department of Labor Standards Enforcement – “DLSE”)提交索赔状。

对于那些服务于至少有50名雇员、工作地点在75英里范围内的单个雇主的人士,根据加州法律,其雇主被要求提供每年12周的保职假期,具体的法律依据来自《家庭医疗假期法案》(FMLA)或《加州家庭权益法案》(CFRA),旨在解决雇员或其家庭成员的严重健康问题。享受此保职假期的条件,要求雇员必须为雇主工作至少满一年,以及在上个日历年度完成工作量1250个小时。至于雇员或其家庭成员一旦染上COVID-19疾病,他们或许可以得到有关医疗假期法律的保护。这些法律或许也保护那些因家里有免疫系统受损的人士而获得医生病假单的工人,因为他们或其家庭成员正在遭受慢性病的影响。

FMLA和CFRA规定的是无薪假期,了解这一点非常重要(尽管SDI或许可以索赔)。

如果我是COVID-19高危人员将如何?

加州的残疾人权利法要求雇主提供合理便利措施

根据加州《公平雇佣和居住法》(Fair Employment and Housing Act – “FEHA”),对于符合残疾资格的雇员,法律要求雇主必须为该雇员提供合理便利措施,例如安排员工居家工作或者提供病假。这里必须具体情况具体分析,但患有免疫系统疾病或有医疗风险的雇员,应主张他们的权利或要求留在能保证安全的措施。

拥有至少5个雇员的加州雇主,必须提供合理便利措施,除非雇主能证明提供该措施将导致对他运作的过度困难。

社区法律援助机构Legal Aid at Work提供了“如何申请合理工作安排”的指南。在申请合理工作安排时最好的做法就是提供残疾和工作安排要求的书面文件,包括医生证明。如果因医疗系统受损而无法提供这类文件,雇员可向雇主解释或提供可资参考的公共信息,证明合理处所的实际需要。比如说,加州公共卫生局鼓励高危人群“呆在家中”,三藩市公共卫生局则敦促工作人员“尽可能远程通勤”,并“避免接触患病人士”。

COVID-9所带来的风险,更多工人将会复合那些在FEHA规定下有资格享受合理工作安排。在FEHA规定下,“残障”解释为身体残障,包括对免疫系统产生影响并且因此对主要日常活动产生限制。法律还认定了所谓“主要日常活动”,包括与他人的互动、工作、以及免疫系统的主要功能。虽然该法律指定普通感冒和普通流感为例外,这不包括COVID-19因为这种病毒是前所未有。

“合理工作安排”措施的目的是保证雇员能继续工作和赚到工资。因此,须考虑的首要可行性是在家工作。如果雇员可以持续发挥他们工作中的关键功能,在家工作是一种合理的工作安排。对于那些可以通过电脑、视像会议和电话工作的雇员,在家工作是一个理想的选择。

如果让雇员在家工作会过度增加雇主经营的困难,雇主可以予以拒绝。如果员工在家无法完成工作,法律允许工人请假。但假期必须“允许雇员在假期结束时再回来工作,这样既可以或无需进一步提供合理工作安排措施,从而不会增加雇主的经营负担。”

雇主不可以以包揽政策(blanket policies)为理由而拒绝在家工作或病假(或任何其他可能合理工作安排)。而应该将心比心地真诚互动,去寻找有效的合理处所。任何对残障人士的歧视性或或报复性行为,包括非一视同仁的纪律惩罚、威胁或除名,都是受加州法律禁止的。这些保护措施可以延伸至那些被雇主假定或“认为”是残障的人士。雇主固然可以要求提供有关残障的医生证明,或雇员劳动力限度的证明,却不可以强迫雇员披露特定的健康条件或残障状况的个人信息。

如果我家里有人是高危人群怎么办?

以上提过的加州家庭权利法 (California Family Rights Act – “CFRA”)不单只要求雇主提供长达12周的无薪假期,并确保雇员的工作岗位。该假期可用于照顾受到严重的健康状况的家人。有薪家庭假期PFL可以通过EDD申请。

FEHA禁止在工作上针对残障人士或与残疾人士有关的人的歧视性或报复性行为。此保护包括申请合理工作安排,无论雇主是否提供了安排。如过你家人属于高危人群而认为你需要得到合理的工作安排,请向劳工法律师请教你的法律权益。

如果在工作场合暴露在COVID-19将如何?

雇主疾病和工伤预防及工人补偿计划

加州职业安全局(Division of Occupational Safety and Health – “Cal/OSHA”)提供了为应付COVID-19的有关指引。该指引覆盖大部分行业,包括托儿和医疗,积极鼓励有病患的雇员呆在家里,将有急性呼吸道症状的员工立即回家,做好疫情爆发的反应预案。针对健康护理行业的雇员,指引还强调了培训、操作实践以及个人保护设施的使用等方面。

加州残障福利和医疗隐私法通常禁止雇主查问雇员的身体健康情况。但如果雇主,根据客观的证据,合理的相信雇员的生体情况妨碍他完成工作的基本职能或生体情况直接威胁工作安全,雇主可以提问雇员的健康情况或要求雇员接受身体检查。例如,雇员告诉雇主他得了COVID-19,雇主应该确定该雇员在过去14天接触过的员工并且通知该员工有关暴露的消息。雇主不可以提供被感染的员工的名字或其他的个人信息。

加州法律保护员工“吹哨子”行为,例如向上司投诉工作场所安全问题。如果情况严重,员工也可以直接向Cal/OSHA递交投诉信。如果继续工作会产生真实和明显的危害,员工可以拒绝工作。在这种情况下,该员工可以索求损失的工资。如需详细信息,请参考WorkSafe网站。因为这种情况非常复杂,鼓励工人向劳工法律师请教你的法律权益。

我的工作属于关键行业内吗?

加州公共卫生官员提供了“关键基础设施部门”的清单。该部门必须继续遵守残障保护法和其他工地安全规定。各县和城市有具体指定某些商业为关键服务。

工伤保险

雇主有责任通过工人补偿系统向工作中受伤的雇员提供补偿。

那些在工作接触COVID-19而受伤害的雇员,可通过填制DWC1表并呈交给雇主,申请索赔。

任何工作场所,必然是雇员受伤的重要因素。雇主经常会为是否因工作受伤争论不休。这些争议,通常通过工人赔偿上诉委员会(Worker’s Compensation Appeals Board)所指定的医学检查小组(通常由免疫系统或内科专家组成)的医学报告做出裁决。

如果索赔获得通过,赔偿金将包括临时残障工资、医药费,以及永久伤残补偿等构成。遗憾的是,雇员误分类为独立合同工的人士,要等到2020年7月1日才有资格申领工人赔偿金。

在公共卫生紧急事件中,工人须要更多保护措施

加州州长纽森、加州立法会议员、以及国会发布了公告,介绍了将加强旨在保护因隔离令受到歧视或报复的工人,提供临时收入补贴等其他提案。随着法律的改变,本文将会陆续更新。

About Ken Wang, Esq.

Legislative Policy Associate, California Employment Lawyers Association