Hinshaw's 12 Days of California Labor & Employment Series – Day 4: No-Rehire Provision Now Includes One More Exception

In the spirit of the season—and keeping some semblance of normal—we are using our annual "12 days of the holidays" blog series to address new California laws and their impact on California employers. On this fourth day of the holidays, my labor and employment attorney gave to me: four calling birds and AB 2143.

No-rehire provisions were banned in employment settlement agreements as of January 1, 2020, per SB 749. There was one exception, though: if the employer made a good faith determination that the employee engaged in sexual harassment or sexual assault. If that was documented, a no-rehire provision was allowed. While this exception was helpful, SB 749 caused employer frustration throughout 2020 because it lacks other exceptions. For instance, an employer may settle employment claims, complaints or actions against them, but they are unable to include a no-rehire provision with the employee who initiated the claim. It also did not protect employers from a bad faith claim. Enter AB 2143. More ›

Hinshaw's 12 Days of California Labor & Employment Series – Day 3: Racial and Ethnic Diversity at the Forefront for California-Based Publicly Held Corporations

In the spirit of the season—and keeping some semblance of normal—we are using our annual "12 days of the holidays" blog series to address new California laws and their impact on California employers. On this third day of the holidays, my labor and employment attorney gave to me: three French hens and AB 979.

This bill is reminiscent of one we kicked off our annual series with back in 2018, which came in the wake of the #MeToo movement. The bill, SB 826, required any publicly held corporation with its principal office located in California, to include at least one woman director on the corporation's Board of Directors by the end of 2019. It further provided that, by the end of 2021, corporations with five or more directors must include at least two female board members, and corporations with six or more directors must include at least three female board members. While SB 826 addressed gender equality, AB 979 focuses on racial and ethnic diversity. More ›

The 12 Days of California Labor & Employment Series – Day 7: Cal/OSHA Reporting Requirements

It's the end of the year and while everyone is busy, employers in California should be aware of new laws and regulations that go into effect on January 1, 2020. In the spirit of the season, we are using the "12 days of the holidays" to blog daily about one of these new California laws and its impact on California employers. On the seventh day of the holidays, my labor and employment attorney gave to me: seven swans a swimming and AB 1804 and 1805. More ›

The 12 Days of California Labor & Employment Series – Day 6: Au Naturel Hair is Always Welcome

It's the end of the year and while everyone is busy, employers in California should be aware of new laws and regulations that go into effect on January 1, 2020. In the spirit of the season, we are using the "12 days of the holidays" to blog daily about one of these new California laws and its impact on California employers. On the sixth day of the holidays, my labor and employment attorney gave to me: six geese a laying and SB 188. More ›

The 12 Days of California Labor & Employment Series – Day 5: More Expansion to Lactation Accommodations

It's the end of the year and while everyone is busy, employers in California should be aware of new laws and regulations that go into effect on January 1, 2020. In the spirit of the season, we are using the "12 days of the holidays" to blog daily about one of these new California laws and its impact on California employers. On the fifth day of the holidays, my labor and employment attorney gave to me: five golden rings and SB 142. More ›

The 12 Days of California Labor & Employment Series – Day 2: Longer Statute of Limitations for Harassment, Discrimination, and Retaliation Claims was not on Employers' Holiday Wish List

It's the end of the year and while everyone is busy, employers in California should be aware of new laws and regulations that go into effect on January 1, 2020. In the spirit of the season, we are using the "12 days of the holidays" to blog daily about one of these new California laws and the law's impact on California employers. On the second day of the holidays, my labor and employment attorney gave to me: two turtle doves and AB 9. More ›

The 12 Days of California Labor & Employment Series – Day 1: No Rehire Provision is Now a No-No

It's back! Hard to believe another year is coming to a close and the holidays are fast approaching. As always, the legislature is keeping California employers busy; California has once again enacted many employment laws this year set to go into effect in 2020. In the spirit of the season, it's time for our annual "12 days of the holidays" series, where we will blog daily about one California law and its impact on California employers. So, on the first day of the holidays, my labor and employment attorney gave to me: a partridge in a pear tree and SB 749. More ›

California Law Prohibits No-Rehire Provisions in Settlement Agreements

California law typically frowns on contracts that restrict a person's ability to engage in trade for their chosen profession. In keeping with this philosophy, the California legislature has passed AB 749, which was recently signed into law by Governor Newsom. Employers are encouraged to review their settlement agreements to address the new prohibition of no-rehire provisions before the law goes into effect on January 1, 2020. More ›

Hair Today…Discrimination Tomorrow? California and New York Adopt Hair Style Protections, Others Surely to Follow

On July 3, 2019, California Governor Gavin Newsom approved Senate Bill No. 188 providing legal protection from discrimination in the workplace and in public schools for natural and protective hairstyles historically worn by black people and people of color. This bill expanded the scope of what is considered a protected race category under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act to include traits "historically associated with race, including, but not limited to, hair texture and protective hairstyles." Following California's lead, New York then became the second state to ban discrimination based on natural hairstyles on July 12, 2019, when Governor Andrew Cuomo signed into law S.6209A/A.7797A, which amends the Human Rights Law and Dignity for All Students Act. There is now proposed legislation in New Jersey as well, modeled after Senate Bill No. 188. This means employers in other states should take a hard look at their workplace hair and grooming policies to avoid discrimination actions. More ›

Hair today...discrimination case tomorrow?

California is well on its way to unanimously becoming the first state to ban discrimination in schools and workplaces based on hair/hairstyles, hair textures, and protective hairstyles such as twists, braids, updos, and wigs. The CROWN (Create a Respectful and Open Workplace for Natural Hair) Act would prohibit employers and schools from enforcing discriminatory grooming, hair keeping policies, or dress codes that could disproportionately affect people of color. Going forward, California employers should look at their related polices to ensure they are non-discriminatory and do not specifically target hairstyles or hair textures of people of color. More ›