Being the
nation's most populous state is not California's only claim to fame. Allowed to
talk off the record, many employers who have learned the rigors of coping with
the Golden State's often-unique approaches to employment laws will say those
laws frequently help make California the most challenging state in which to do
business.
The wide range of
mandates in California labor law posters is one prime
example of how California can complicate an employer's job. To take just one
example, dealing with the already-complex task of avoiding job discriminating
against job seekers and workers who are pregnant and are seeking time off is
made all the more difficult due to the state’s multiple mandates, and their
differences from the requirements of federal law.
Employers in all
states have to meet federal EEOC requirements, but that's not the whole story. California
has its own laws in the area, which give workers as much as four months
pregnancy disability leave, complete with extended health benefits, with no
minimum time in the job required. The leave is for disabilities caused by
pregnancy, childbirth and related medical conditions, without any requirement
that the employee have worked for the employer for any specified length of
time.
The state rules
also cover more businesses than do the federal rules, define key terms like
"disability" more broadly, and expand its reach into the new area of
job bias due to "perceived pregnancy" disability. Employers who long
ago had come to terms with the state rules may need to check again, since the
state has recently revised them. And employers might also want to check the
federal Family and Medical Leave Act, while they're at it.
Figuring the
interplay of California's often ambitious workplace rules with the requirements
of federal law is not a California employer's only headache. The state's rich
array of its own laws can be confounding. For instance, the state's Family
Rights Act lets workers take up to 12 weeks unpaid leave after a birth,
adoption or foster care placement, while the state's Family Temporary
Disability Insurance program may extend a worker's unemployment compensation
payments in some similar cases.
Another example
of complexity and confusion awaiting a California employer can be found in the
state's paid vacation law. Federal law and the laws in most states permit
employers to have workers lose any unused vacation time at year end, but
California includes untaken vacation time in its definition of wages, and
decisions by the state's court have struck down employer policies that result
in unused vacation time being forfeited. As a result, no matter what benefit
program a national employer may have, it is a fair bet it may have to create a
new variant to satisfy California's requirements.
California is
also far from hesitant to impose requirements on employers in the state, even
in areas where few, if any, other states have. So, for example, the state
demands that firms with 50 or more workers provide a minimum of two hours
training to its supervisors and managers on the subject of sexual harassment,
with biannual retraining also mandated. Certainly, sexual harassment is a
serious problem to be prevented, and potential liability employers are
well-advised to avoid, but few states are as ready as California to jump into
the task of specifying the details of private employers' executive training programs.
In another illustration, the state has recently mandated that some employers
display workplace notices to inform their workers and the public of hotlines
set up to aid victims of human trafficking.
No comments:
Post a Comment