Employment Law Updates: January 2021

Federal Law Updates: January 2021

Ten Federal along with D.C and three State Law Updates have been issued.  Our HR Advisors are versed and ready to answer your toughest HR questions to help your company through working remotely, coming back to work and all year long.

January 2021 Law Alert Map

Labor Law Updates for January 2021

1

CDC COVID-19 Workplace Testing Guidelines Emphasize Consent and Disclosure

The CDC updated guidance on COVID-19 Workplace testing.

On January 21, 2021, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) updated its guidance on COVID-19 workplace testing. The guidance emphasizes that workplace-based testing should not be conducted without employees informed consent so they understand the testing process and may act independently to make choices that align with their values, goals, and preferences.

The guidance details the disclosures that an employer must provide to its employees, for instance:

  • Test manufacturer, name, purpose, and type.
  • How the test will be performed.
  • Known and potential risks of harm, discomforts, and benefits of the test.
  • What a positive or negative test result means, including: 
    • Test reliability and limitations; and
    • Public health guidance to isolate or quarantine at home, if applicable.

The guidance also addresses topics employers should be prepared to discuss with their employees, such as test scheduling and payment, testing sites, communication and interpretation of results, employee privacy, and how to get assistance.

The CDC also provides a SARS-CoV-2 Testing Strategy: Considerations for Non-Healthcare Workplaces website, updated October 21, 2020, which identifies additional, important disclosures that employers should give to employees contemplating testing.

2

DOL Opinion Letters Addressing FLSA Exemptions and Worker Classification

The DOL released a new opinion letter addressing FLSA compliance.

On January 19, 2021, the U.S. Department of Labor released the following new opinion letters addressing Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) compliance:

  • FLSA2021-6: Addressing whether the FLSA’s “retail or service establishment” exemption applies to staffing firms that recruit, hire, and place employees on assignments with clients. 
  • FLSA2021-7: Addressing whether certain local small-town and community news source journalists are creative or learned professionals under Section 13(a)(1) of the FLSA. 
  • FLSA2021-8: Addressing whether certain distributors of a manufacturer’s food products are employees or independent contractors under the FLSA. 

FLSA2021-9: Addressing whether requiring tractor-trailer truck drivers to implement legally required safety measures creates control by the motor carrier for worker classification (employee or independent contractor) under the FLSA and whether certain owner-operators are correctly classified as independent contractors.

Back To Top

3

DOL Releases Opinion Letters for Two FLSA Topics: Tipped Workers and Establishment Workers

The DOL released an opinion letter regarding two FLSA topics.

On January 15, 2021, the U.S. Department of Labor released the following Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) opinion letters:

  • FLSA 2021-5: This letter provided a step-by-step calculation of overtime pay under the FLSA when a tipped employee works as a server and bartender, receives tips, and also receives automatic gratuities or service charges.
  • FLSA 2021-4: This letter found that a restaurant can implement a nontraditional tip pool under the FLSA’s new regulatory changes, not yet effective but set to be soon, so long as it does not include any managers or supervisors, the employer does not take a tip credit, and it pays the full minimum wage to both the tipped employees (servers) who contribute to the pool and the non-tipped employees (hosts or hostesses) who receive tips from the pool. A nontraditional tip pool includes both tipped employees and non-tipped employees.

FLSA 2021-3: This letter assessed three different entities and whether they satisfy the FLSA’s establishment requirement, which provides an exemption from minimum wage and overtime provisions for workers of an amusement or recreational establishment, and whether an accrual method of accounting may be used to satisfy the FLSA’s Receipts Test.

4

EEOC and Religious Discrimination Clarifications

The EEOC approved revisions to its Compliance Manual Section on Religious Discrimination.

On January 15, 2021, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) approved revisions to its Compliance Manual Section on Religious Discrimination. The updated guidance describes how Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects against religious discrimination in the workplace and details legal protections available to religious employers. Importantly, the EEOC states that “the manual does not have the force and effect of law and is not meant to bind the public in any way. It is intended to provide clarity to the public on existing requirements under the law and how the EEOC will analyze these matters in performing its duties.”

5

Replacement Sticker Extending Permanent Resident Card (Green Card) Validity and Form I-9

The USCIS announces it is replacing the current sticker extending the validity of a Form I-551, PRC or Green Card.

On January 12, 2021, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced that it is replacing the currently issued sticker that extends the validity of a Form I-551, Permanent Resident Card (PRC), or Green Card, with a revised Form I-797, Notice of Action, receipt notice of Form I-90, Application to Replace Permanent Resident Card. The revised notice will extend the validity of a PRC for 12 months from the “Card Expires” date on the front of the PRC. This change ensures that certain lawful permanent residents have documentation for completing Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification.

Employees may present their expired PRC together with this notice as an acceptable List A document that establishes identity and employment authorization for Form I-9 purposes. When completing a Form I-9, employers should enter the information from this document combination in Section 2, under List A:

  • In the Document Number field, enter the card number provided on the expired PRC. 
  • In the Expiration Date field, enter the date that is 12 months from the “Card Expires” date on the expired PRC.
  • In the Additional Information box, write “PRC Ext” and the I-90 receipt number from the Form I-797.

Employers who retain copies of documents should retain copies of both the PRC and Form I-797 with the employee’s Form I-9. Employers may not reverify Lawful Permanent Residents who present this document combination.

Read more about acceptable documents at I-9 Central or in The Handbook for Employers, Guidance for Completing Form I-9.

Back To Top

6

FLSA Opinion Letters: Administrative Employee Exemption and Ministerial Exception

The U.S. DOL announces new opinion letter related to the FLSA.

On January 8, 2021, the U.S. Department of Labor announced the following new opinion letters that provide compliance assistance related to the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA): 

  • FLSA2021-1: Addressing whether account managers at a life science products manufacturer qualify for the administrative employee exemption under the FLSA. The DOL concluded that the account managers were administrative employees because they met all three requirements, discussed thoroughly in the letter, necessary to qualify for the exemption (from the FLSA minimum wage and overtime pay requirements).

FLSA2021-2: Addressing whether the ministerial exception allows a private religious daycare and preschool to pay its teachers on a salary basis that would not otherwise conform with the requirements of the FLSA. The DOL concluded that the exception would allow the school to do so if the teachers qualify as ministers.

7

OSHA Penalty Amount Increases

The U.S. DOL announces adjustments to the OSHA.

On January 8, 2021, the U.S. Department of Labor announced the following 2021 adjustments to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) civil penalty amounts:

  • Serious violations: minimum of $964 per violation and maximum of $13,653 per violation.
  • Other-than-serious violations: minimum of $0 per violation and maximum of $13,653 per violation.
  • Willful or repeated violations: minimum of $9,639 per violation and maximum of $136,532 per violation.
  • Posting requirements violations: minimum of $0 per violation and maximum of $13,653 per violation.
  • Failure to abate violation: $13,653 per day unabated beyond the abatement date, which is generally limited to 30 days maximum.

These increases apply to penalties assessed after January 15, 2021.

Back To Top

8

Final Rule Clarifies Independent Contractor Status under the Fair Labor Standards Act

DOL announces a final rule clarifying employee vs. independent contractor under the FLSA.

On January 6, 2021, the U.S. Department of Labor, Wage and Hour Division announced a final rule clarifying whether an individual is an employee or an independent contractor under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The rule:

  • Reaffirms the “economic reality” test  which determines whether an individual is in business for themselves (independent contractor) or is economically dependent on a potential employer for work (FLSA employee). 
  • Identifies and explains two core factors to determine whether a worker is economically dependent on someone else’s business (employee) or is in business for themselves (independent contractor): 
    • The nature and degree of control over the work; and
    • The worker’s opportunity for profit or loss based on initiative and/or investment.

If those two primary core factors do not point to the same classification, then the rule identifies the following additional factors to determine status:

  • The amount of skill required for the work;
  • The degree of permanence of the working relationship between the worker and the potential employer; and
  • Whether the work is part of an integrated unit of production.

The rule also:

  • Identifies that the actual practice of the worker and the potential employer is more relevant than what may be contractually or theoretically possible.
  • Provides six fact-specific examples applying the factors.

The rule is effective March 8, 2021.  

Back To Top

9

COVID-19 Relief for Employers Using the Automobile Lease Valuation Rule

DOL announces a final rule clarifying employee vs. independent contractor under the FLSA.

On January 4, 2021, the Internal Revenue Service released Notice 2021-07 which provides temporary relief in response to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic for employers using the automobile lease valuation rule to value an employee’s personal use of an employer-provided automobile for:

  • Income inclusion;
  • Employment tax; and
  • Reporting.

Due solely to the COVID-19 pandemic, if certain requirements are satisfied, employers and employees using the automobile lease valuation rule to determine the value of an employee’s personal use of an employer-provided automobile may instead use the vehicle cents-per-mile valuation rule beginning March 13, 2020.

10

2021 IRS Forms

New publications and forms released by the IRS.

On December 31, 2020 and January 5, 2021, the federal Internal Revenue Service released the following new forms and publications, among many others, for use in 2021:

  • Form W-4 – Employee’s Withholding Certificate
  • Form W-4P – Withholding Certificate for Pension or Annuity Payments
  • Publication 531 – Reporting Tip Income

Individual state labor laws

State Specific Labor Law Updates:

Compliance can weigh down even the most experienced professionals. Our HR Advisors, one click compliance Handbook ,Compliance Database, HR Tools and Employee Training are ready to help navigate HR all year long. Everything included with your AllMyHR™ Solutions

tryhris HR Solutions guarantee and signature

Previous Labor Laws & Information

Back To Top

Top 7 HR Mistakes

7 Common HR Mistakes to Avoid

Do not ignore the human resources side of your business! This happens when things seem to be going well. After all, why look for trouble when you have enough to deal with every day. Relations with employees run the spectrum of emotions, depending on the situation.

Do not be a reactive HR person, professional HR people are proactive in recognizing/rectifying HR mistakes. Avoiding serious problems, will save countless headaches and protect your company against costly legal claims.

Mistake #1: Your outdated employee handbook

Every business, large and small must have an up to date Federal and State compliant employee handbook. If you do not have current rules and behaviors in writing, you are asking for problems. Include laws/compliance changes, which may legally impact your policies.

If you have not spelled out acceptable and expected behavior, by providing tangible guidelines, you may be exposed to costly litigation. Your company employee handbook should be updated, as compliance changes occur. This of course may be difficult to accomplish without automated compliance alerts. As we all know employees should sign an acknowledgment form stating that they received the publication and will abide by its policies. Since compliance changes can and do happen often, we recommend all employees sign off on their handbook annually.

Mistake #2: Be sure you document positive and negative performance

We cannot emphasize enough the importance of writing out policies and operating procedures. Without these you have no boundaries for proper employee conduct. When violations occur, they must thoroughly document. Although it takes time to document when an employee was reprimanded, for example frequent tardiness, it may become needed evidence to support a decision to terminate employment. 

Being consistent and documenting employee interactions will help to better address potential litigation that could arise in the future.

Back To Top

Mistake #3: Not properly maintaining employee files

For compliance, it is important to keep records containing all the personnel documents including employee work history.

Do not include all employee documents in the same employee file. Documents containing employee’s personal information should be kept in a different (secured) file. 

We recommend having a file for I-9s, which verify employee eligibility to work in the U.S. Fines add up fast if you don’t have current and correct documents ready when request by Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

And remember HIPAA, requires employees’ personal health and welfare information to also be kept separate.

Mistake #4: Quick hires and incomplete job descriptions

Hurried hiring and promotion processes can lead to a host of Employers Problems can be compounded when companies hire and promote quickly. Providing a proper job description to potential hires helps alleviate future misunderstanding, problems and sometimes law suites.

Producing a proper job description will help you reduce future hassles. Complete job descriptions will make it easier to hire the best candidate for the job. Bonus! Your new employee will start off with a clear, structured understanding of their job requirements.

Mistake #5: Training or lack of…

Your employees are your companies most important asset. Maximize their potential by providing training courses. Training will increase their success and thereby increase your company’s overall success. Including courses in subjects like Sexual Harassment will contribute to a safer work environment and potentially protect your company against litigation. Training your employees properly should be considered an investment in your company’s future. 

Providing certificates of completion for formalized training can increase   employee morale, recognition and should always be included in their performance reviews.

Back To Top

Mistake #6: Insufficient HR policies

Start with an internal HR audit. In the ever-changing world of HR compliance most companies do not have the HR staff or resources internally to ensure compliance. If this describes your company, consider taking advantage of outside resources.

A well-thought-out plan will protect you, your employees, and your company.

Having policies and plans for handling unexpected events reduces the stress, potential liabilities, and costs.

Mistake #7: Employment compliance knowledge

A well-run HR department must be up to date on employment laws and regulations. To do this they will require trusted resources. When in doubt ask for professional assistance. 

Being out of compliance with OSHA regulations will bring hours of additional work as well as stiff fines.

Avoiding costly mistakes is much easier than fixing them. Take the time to know the government agencies that regulate your business. 

Conclusion

Even in the best of times, day-to-day business operations can distract you from spending time on the human resource side of your business Being proactive when it comes to human resources will help to avoid serious problems, save countless headaches and protect your company against costly legal claims.

Human resources and compliance can weigh down even the most experienced professionals. Our HR Advisors, one click compliance Handbook ,Compliance Database, HR Tools and Employee Training are ready to help navigate HR all year long. Everything included with your AllMyHR™ Solutions

tryhris HR Solutions guarantee and signature

Previous Labor Laws & Information

Federal Law Alert: COVID Tax Credits Extended

covid-tax-relief-credits-extended-allmyhr

COVID Relief Bill: Tax credits for paid leave extended to March 31

A new $900 billion coronavirus relief bill became law and answers the question of whether federal Emergency Paid Sick Leave (EPSL) and Emergency Family and Medical Leave (EFMLA) will be extended.

The answer is yes, but it’s an option, not a requirement. Here’s what employers need to know:

  • Offering EPSL and EFMLA after December 31 will become optional for employers.
  • An employee will no longer be entitled by law to take EPSL or EFMLA, even if they have a qualifying reason.
  • Employers who choose to offer these paid leaves can still receive a tax credit if they follow the current EPSL and EFMLA rules, including job protection.
  • The extension of the tax credit will be available for leaves taken through March 31, 2021.
  • Employees will not get new hours to use—the unused portion of their original allotment that remains on January 1 is how much they will be able to use through March 31. For instance, if an employee who was entitled to 80 hours of EPSL between April 1 and December 31 used 40 of those hours in 2020, they’d have 40 hours left to use between January 1 and March 31, 2021.
  • There is a possible exception when an employee’s EFMLA bank could reset if employers use the calendar year or another fixed FMLA tracking period that starts before March 31 and the DOL fails to readopt the regulations they wrote related to EFMLA. We expect the IRS, DOL, or both, to provide guidance soon that will clear up whether certain employers will need to offer additional hours. We will update Comply as information becomes available.

The new law also extends or revives several other types of economic assistance from previous coronavirus-related legislation, some of which are listed below. These aspects of the law are outside the scope of our services, so we are unable to answer follow-up questions. Some of the notable provisions include:

  • Individual payments of $600 for people with incomes at or below $75,000 and $600 per dependent child, with payments phased out for higher incomes
  • A $300 weekly supplemental unemployment benefit, through March 14, 2021
  • Extension of Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (for gig workers and the self-employed) and Pandemic Emergency Unemployment Compensation (for those who run out of state unemployment insurance benefits), through March 14, 2021
  • Reopening and refunding of the Paycheck Protection Program (see your financial or tax advisor for additional information)

We have many resources related to EPSL and EFMLA available on Comply. We will be updating our content to indicate that the program becomes optional on January 1.

Compliance can weigh down even the most experienced professionals. Our HR Advisors, one click compliance Handbook ,Compliance Database, HR Tools and Employee Training are ready to help navigate HR all year long. Everything included with your AllMyHR™ Solutions

tryhris HR Solutions guarantee and signature

Previous Labor Laws & Information

Employment Law Updates: December 2020

Federal Law Updates: December 2020

Five Federal along with D.C and seven State Law Updates have been issued.  Our HR Advisors are versed and ready to answer your toughest HR questions to help your company through working remotely, coming back to work and all year long.

December 2020 Law Alert Map

Labor Law Updates for December 2020

1

Pandemic Relief

President Trump signs the 2021 Consolidated Appropriations Act applicable to COVID-19 or another coronavirus with pandemic potential.

On December 27, 2020, President Donald Trump signed the 2021 Consolidated Appropriations Act (US H 133) containing the 2021 Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act applicable to SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) or another coronavirus with pandemic potential. Generally, the act:

  • Extends some Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) economic assistance. For instance: 
    • Reinstatement of Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation (FPUC) in the amount of $300 for weeks of unemployment beginning after December 26, 2020 through March 14, 2021.
    • Extension and modification of temporary Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA) through March 14, 2021 and phasing out on April 5, 2021. The phasing out is for those individuals who remain eligible after March 14, 2021 and have not exhausted their maximum benefits entitlement. However, under the act, no PUA benefits can be paid after April 5.
    • Extension of employee retention tax credit to wages paid before July 1, 2021.
    • Expansion and continuation of the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP).
  • Allows employers to continue taking tax credits for qualifying paid sick and family leave under the Federal Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA) through March 14, 2021. However, beginning January 1, 2021, employers are not required to provide employees with paid FFCRA leave.

Specific to the FFCRA:

  • Beginning January 1, 2021, employers are not required to provide employees with paid FFCRA leave, which includes both COVID-related emergency paid sick leave (EPSL) and emergency family and medical leave (EFMLA). However, employees may still be entitled to paid sick leave or emergency COVID leave under state or local law.
  • For employers that voluntarily provide paid sick and family and medical leave that would have otherwise qualified as FFCRA leave: 
    • Federal payroll tax credits are extended through March 31, 2021 (if the individual did not exhaust their maximum FFCRA leave allotment and the leave did not expire on December 31, 2020).
    • Employees do not get a new bank of FFCRA hours in 2021 – the amount they have available on January 1, 2021 is how much they can use through March 31, 2021. There is a possible exception if employers use the calendar year or another fixed FMLA tracking period that starts before March 31, 2021.

The IRS and DOL will soon provide more information and detailed guidance on the act’s implementation.

2

IRS Issues 2021 Standard Mileage Rates

The IRS released the 2021 optional standard mileage rates.

On December 22, 2020, the Internal Revenue Service released Notice 2021-02 with the 2021 optional standard mileage rates for taxpayers to use to calculate the deductible costs of operating an automobile for business, charitable, medical, or moving purpose. Beginning on January 1, 2021, the standard mileage rates for the use of a car (also vans, pickups, or panel trucks) will be:

  • 56 cents per mile driven for business use;
  • 16 cents per mile driven for medical, or moving purposes for qualified active duty members of the Armed Forces; and
  • 14 cents per mile driven in service of charitable organizations, which is unchanged from 2020.

The notice also provides that:

  • The maximum standard automobile cost to compute the allowance under a fixed and variable rate plan (FAVR plan) may not exceed $51,100 for automobiles (including trucks and vans)l; and
  • The maximum fair market value of employer-provided automobiles for the fleet-average valuation rule and the vehicle cents-per-mile valuation rule (including trucks and vans) first made available to employees in calendar year 2021 is $51,100.

Back To Top

3

EEOC COVID-19 Guidance and Vaccines

U.S. EEOC updated its “What You Should Know About COVID-19 and the ADA, the Rehabilitation Act, and Other EEO Laws”.

On December 16, 2020, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) updated its “What You Should Know About COVID-19 and the ADA, the Rehabilitation Act, and Other EEO Lawspublication by including:

  • A new section for employers and employees about how a COVID-19 vaccination interacts with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA).
  • Information about medical pre-screening questions and employer accommodations for those unable to receive a vaccination.

These new sections are provided below and are directly from the publication.

ADA and Vaccinations

K.1. For any COVID-19 vaccine that has been approved or authorized by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), is the administration of a COVID-19 vaccine to an employee by an employer (or by a third party with whom the employer contracts to administer a vaccine) a “medical examination” for purposes of the ADA? (12/16/20)

No.  The vaccination itself is not a medical examination.  As the Commission explained in guidance on disability-related inquiries and medical examinations, a medical examination is “a procedure or test usually given by a health care professional or in a medical setting that seeks information about an individual’s physical or mental impairments or health.”  Examples include “vision tests; blood, urine, and breath analyses; blood pressure screening and cholesterol testing; and diagnostic procedures, such as x-rays, CAT scans, and MRIs.”  If a vaccine is administered to an employee by an employer for protection against contracting COVID-19, the employer is not seeking information about an individual’s impairments or current health status and, therefore, it is not a medical examination.

Although the administration of a vaccination is not a medical examination, pre-screening vaccination questions may implicate the ADA’s provision on disability-related inquiries, which are inquiries likely to elicit information about a disability.  If the employer administers the vaccine, it must show that such pre-screening questions it asks employees are “job-related and consistent with business necessity.”  

K.2. According to the CDC, health care providers should ask certain questions before administering a vaccine to ensure that there is no medical reason that would prevent the person from receiving the vaccination. If the employer requires an employee to receive the vaccination from the employer (or a third party with whom the employer contracts to administer a vaccine) and asks these screening questions, are these questions subject to the ADA standards for disability-related inquiries? (12/16/20)

Yes. Pre-vaccination medical screening questions are likely to elicit information about a disability. This means that such questions, if asked by the employer or a contractor on the employer’s behalf, are “disability-related” under the ADA. Thus, if the employer requires an employee to receive the vaccination, administered by the employer, the employer must show that these disability-related screening inquiries are “job-related and consistent with business necessity.”  To meet this standard, an employer would need to have a reasonable belief, based on objective evidence, that an employee who does not answer the questions and, therefore, does not receive a vaccination, will pose a direct threat to the health or safety of her or himself or others. 

By contrast, there are two circumstances in which disability-related screening questions can be asked without needing to satisfy the “job-related and consistent with business necessity” requirement. First, if an employer has offered a vaccination to employees on a voluntary basis (i.e. employees choose whether to be vaccinated), the ADA requires that the employee’s decision to answer pre-screening, disability-related questions also must be voluntary. If an employee chooses not to answer these questions, the employer may decline to administer the vaccine but may not retaliate against, intimidate, or threaten the employee for refusing to answer any questions. Second, if an employee receives an employer-required vaccination from a third party that does not have a contract with the employer, such as a pharmacy or other health care provider, the ADA “job-related and consistent with business necessity” restrictions on disability-related inquiries would not apply to the pre-vaccination medical screening questions.  

The ADA requires employers to keep any employee medical information obtained in the course of the vaccination program confidential.

K.3. Is asking or requiring an employee to show proof of receipt of a COVID-19 vaccination a disability-related inquiry? (12/16/20)

No. There are many reasons that may explain why an employee has not been vaccinated, which may or may not be disability-related. Simply requesting proof of receipt of a COVID-19 vaccination is not likely to elicit information about a disability and, therefore, is not a disability-related inquiry. However, subsequent employer questions, such as asking why an individual did not receive a vaccination, may elicit information about a disability and would be subject to the pertinent ADA standard that they be “job-related and consistent with business necessity.” If an employer requires employees to provide proof that they have received a COVID-19 vaccination from a pharmacy or their own health care provider, the employer may want to warn the employee not to provide any medical information as part of the proof in order to avoid implicating the ADA.

Back To Top

ADA and Title VII Issues Regarding Mandatory Vaccinations

K.4. Where can employers learn more about Emergency Use Authorizations (EUA) of COVID-19 vaccines? (12/16/20)

Some COVID-19 vaccines may only be available to the public for the foreseeable future under EUA granted by the FDA, which is different than approval under FDA vaccine licensure. The FDA has an obligation to:

[E]nsure that recipients of the vaccine under an EUA are informed, to the extent practicable under the applicable circumstances, that FDA has authorized the emergency use of the vaccine, of the known and potential benefits and risks, the extent to which such benefits and risks are unknown, that they have the option to accept or refuse the vaccine, and of any available alternatives to the product.

The FDA says that this information is typically conveyed in a patient fact sheet that is provided at the time of the vaccine administration and that it posts the fact sheets on its website. More information about EUA vaccines is available on the FDA’s EUA page

K.5. If an employer requires vaccinations when they are available, how should it respond to an employee who indicates that he or she is unable to receive a COVID-19 vaccination because of a disability? (12/16/20)

The ADA allows an employer to have a qualification standard that includes “a requirement that an individual shall not pose a direct threat to the health or safety of individuals in the workplace.” However, if a safety-based qualification standard, such as a vaccination requirement, screens out or tends to screen out an individual with a disability, the employer must show that an unvaccinated employee would pose a direct threat due to a “significant risk of substantial harm to the health or safety of the individual or others that cannot be eliminated or reduced by reasonable accommodation.” Employers should conduct an individualized assessment of four factors in determining whether a direct threat exists: the duration of the risk; the nature and severity of the potential harm; the likelihood that the potential harm will occur; and the imminence of the potential harm. A conclusion that there is a direct threat would include a determination that an unvaccinated individual will expose others to the virus at the worksite.  If an employer determines that an individual who cannot be vaccinated due to disability poses a direct threat at the worksite, the employer cannot exclude the employee from the workplace, or take any other action, unless there is no way to provide a reasonable accommodation (absent undue hardship) that would eliminate or reduce this risk so the unvaccinated employee does not pose a direct threat.

If there is a direct threat that cannot be reduced to an acceptable level, the employer can exclude the employee from physically entering the workplace, but this does not mean the employer may automatically terminate the worker. Employers will need to determine if any other rights apply under the EEO laws or other federal, state, and local authorities. For example, if an employer excludes an employee based on an inability to accommodate a request to be exempt from a vaccination requirement, the employee may be entitled to accommodations such as performing the current position remotely. This is the same step that employers take when physically excluding employees from a worksite due to a current COVID-19 diagnosis or symptoms; some workers may be entitled to telework or, if not, may be eligible to take leave under the Families First Coronavirus Response Act, under the FMLA, or under the employer’s policies.

Managers and supervisors responsible for communicating with employees about compliance with the employer’s vaccination requirement should know how to recognize an accommodation request from an employee with a disability and know to whom the request should be referred for consideration. Employers and employees should engage in a flexible, interactive process to identify workplace accommodation options that do not constitute an undue hardship (significant difficulty or expense). This process should include determining whether it is necessary to obtain supporting documentation about the employee’s disability and considering the possible options for accommodation given the nature of the workforce and the employee’s position. The prevalence in the workplace of employees who already have received a COVID-19 vaccination and the amount of contact with others, whose vaccination status could be unknown, may impact the undue hardship consideration. In discussing accommodation requests, employers and employees also may find it helpful to consult the Job Accommodation Network (JAN) website as a resource for different types of accommodations. JAN’s materials specific to COVID-19 are at https://askjan.org/topics/COVID-19.cfm.  

Employers may rely on CDC recommendations when deciding whether an effective accommodation that would not pose an undue hardship is available, but as explained further in Question K.7., there may be situations where an accommodation is not possible. When an employer makes this decision, the facts about particular job duties and workplaces may be relevant. Employers also should consult applicable Occupational Safety and Health Administration standards and guidance. Employers can find OSHA COVID-specific resources at: www.osha.gov/SLTC/covid-19/.

Managers and supervisors are reminded that it is unlawful to disclose that an employee is receiving a reasonable accommodation or retaliate against an employee for requesting an accommodation.

Back To Top

K.6. If an employer requires vaccinations when they are available, how should it respond to an employee who indicates that he or she is unable to receive a COVID-19 vaccination because of a sincerely held religious practice or belief? (12/16/20)

Once an employer is on notice that an employee’s sincerely held religious belief, practice, or observance prevents the employee from receiving the vaccination, the employer must provide a reasonable accommodation for the religious belief, practice, or observance unless it would pose an undue hardship under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.  Courts have defined “undue hardship” under Title VII as having more than a de minimis cost or burden on the employer. EEOC guidance explains that because the definition of religion is broad and protects beliefs, practices, and observances with which the employer may be unfamiliar, the employer should ordinarily assume that an employee’s request for religious accommodation is based on a sincerely held religious belief.  If, however, an employee requests a religious accommodation, and an employer has an objective basis for questioning either the religious nature or the sincerity of a particular belief, practice, or observance, the employer would be justified in requesting additional supporting information.

K.7. What happens if an employer cannot exempt or provide a reasonable accommodation to an employee who cannot comply with a mandatory vaccine policy because of a disability or sincerely held religious practice or belief? (12/16/20)

If an employee cannot get vaccinated for COVID-19 because of a disability or sincerely held religious belief, practice, or observance, and there is no reasonable accommodation possible, then it would be lawful for the employer to exclude the employee from the workplace.  This does not mean the employer may automatically terminate the worker.  Employers will need to determine if any other rights apply under the EEO laws or other federal, state, and local authorities.

Back To Top

Title II of the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act and Vaccinations

K.8. Is Title II of GINA implicated when an employer administers a COVID-19 vaccine to employees or requires employees to provide proof that they have received a COVID-19 vaccination? (12/16/20)

No. Administering a COVID-19 vaccination to employees or requiring employees to provide proof that they have received a COVID-19 vaccination does not implicate Title II of GINA because it does not involve the use of genetic information to make employment decisions, or the acquisition or disclosure of “genetic information” as defined by the statute. This includes vaccinations that use messenger RNA (mRNA) technology, which will be discussed more below. As noted in Question K.9. however, if administration of the vaccine requires pre-screening questions that ask about genetic information, the inquiries seeking genetic information, such as family members’ medical histories, may violate GINA.

Under Title II of GINA, employers may not (1) use genetic information to make decisions related to the terms, conditions, and privileges of employment, (2) acquire genetic information except in six narrow circumstances, or (3) disclose genetic information except in six narrow circumstances. 

Certain COVID-19 vaccines use mRNA technology. This raises questions about genetics and, specifically, about whether such vaccines modify a recipient’s genetic makeup and, therefore, whether requiring an employee to get the vaccine as a condition of employment is an unlawful use of genetic information. The CDC has explained that the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines “do not interact with our DNA in any way” and “mRNA never enters the nucleus of the cell, which is where our DNA (genetic material) is kept.” (See https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/different-vaccines/mrna.html for a detailed discussion about how mRNA vaccines work).  Thus, requiring employees to get the vaccine, whether it uses mRNA technology or not, does not violate GINA’s prohibitions on using, acquiring, or disclosing genetic information.

K.9. Does asking an employee the pre-vaccination screening questions before administering a COVID-19 vaccine implicate Title II of GINA? (12/16/20)

Pre-vaccination medical screening questions are likely to elicit information about disability, as discussed in Question K.2., and may elicit information about genetic information, such as questions regarding the immune systems of family members.  It is not yet clear what screening checklists for contraindications will be provided with COVID-19 vaccinations.

GINA defines “genetic information” to mean: 

  • Information about an individual’s genetic tests;
  • Information about the genetic tests of a family member;
  • Information about the manifestation of disease or disorder in a family member (i.e., family medical history);
  • Information about requests for, or receipt of, genetic services or the participation in clinical research that includes genetic services by the an individual or a family member of the individual; and
  • Genetic information about a fetus carried by an individual or family member or of an embryo legally held by an individual or family member using assisted reproductive technology.

     

If the pre-vaccination questions do not include any questions about genetic information (including family medical history), then asking them does not implicate GINA. However, if the pre-vaccination questions do include questions about genetic information, then employers who want to ensure that employees have been vaccinated may want to request proof of vaccination instead of administering the vaccine themselves. 

GINA does not prohibit an individual employee’s own health care provider from asking questions about genetic information, but it does prohibit an employer or a doctor working for the employer from asking questions about genetic information. If an employer requires employees to provide proof that they have received a COVID-19 vaccination from their own health care provider, the employer may want to warn the employee not to provide genetic information as part of the proof. As long as this warning is provided, any genetic information the employer receives in response to its request for proof of vaccination will be considered inadvertent and therefore not unlawful under GINA.  See 29 CFR 1635.8(b)(1)(i) for model language that can be used for this warning.

Back To Top

4

CDC, COVID-19, and Options to Reduce Quarantine

U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) updated its COVID-19 quarantine options by suggesting quarantine periods shorter than 14-days.

On December 2, 2020, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) updated its COVID-19 quarantine options by suggesting quarantine periods shorter than 14-days. This is because a 14-day quarantine can impose personal burdens that may affect physical and mental health as well as cause economic hardship that may reduce compliance. Therefore, based on local circumstances and resources, the CDC offers the following options as acceptable alternatives to shorten quarantine:

  • Quarantine can end after ten days without testing and if no symptoms have been reported during daily monitoring.
  • When diagnostic testing resources are sufficient and available, then quarantine can end after seven days if a diagnostic specimen tests negative and if no symptoms were reported during daily monitoring. The specimen may be collected and tested 48 hours before ending quarantine (for instance, in anticipation of testing delays) but quarantine cannot end earlier than after seven days.

5

New Opinion Letters Addressing FLSA

DOL announces new opinion letters addressing compliance related to FLSA.

On November 30, 2020, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) released the following new opinion letters addressing Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) compliance:

  • FLSA2020-17: Addressing whether an employee’s regular rate of pay, who is paid on a piece-rate basis, may be calculated by dividing total earnings by the number of productive and nonproductive hours worked during the workweek in the absence of a specific agreement with the employee to use such calculation.
  • FLSA2020-18: Addressing whether insect farming qualifies as agriculture under the FLSA and whether certain workers employed by an insect farming operation may be exempt from overtime pay requirements.

An opinion letter is an official, written opinion by the DOL’s Wage and Hour Division (WHD) on how a particular law applies in specific circumstances presented by the person or entity that requested the letter.

Individual state labor laws

State Specific Labor Law Updates:

Compliance can weigh down even the most experienced professionals. Our HR Advisors, one click compliance Handbook ,Compliance Database, HR Tools and Employee Training are ready to help navigate HR all year long. Everything included with your AllMyHR™ Solutions

tryhris HR Solutions guarantee and signature

Previous Labor Laws & Information

Back To Top

Tips to Manage Vacation Requests

Tips to Manage Vacation Requests

Holidays are a time to spend with family and friends, relax and recharge. Employees often look forward to pairing holidays with taking time off. Holidays a can also mean a vacation planning nightmare for a manager – the whole company can’t all be off at the same time, especially when it comes to small and medium businesses.

There will come a time when vacations requests will conflict and as a manager you will need to rearrange requests to make sure that core business functions are adequately covered.

5 Tips for Managing Employee Vacation Requests

1. Communicate Your PTO Policy

Make sure to go over your PTO (Paid Time Off) policy with each employee – during new hire onboarding is the perfect time to do this. Have the policy in writing accessible in your company’s handbook and have each employee sign off on acknowledging the PTO policy. Make sure the policy clearly states what the policy is, when requests must be submitted by and how conflicts will be handled if they arise.

Examples of conflict resolution might be seniority, first come first serve, manage discretion or prioritizing off-season requests if they worked during the holidays. Firgure out what priorities you’ll take into account to solve conflicts.

2. Create a Standardized PTO Request Process

One employee left you a voice message, one texted you, another emailed you, while another stopped in your office to ask – the perfect storm for issues such as missed requests or missing information that requires extra effort on your part to handle requests.

One example would be to create an online form that must be filled out when requesting PTO. A form would ensure all required data is collected, help to prevent lost or missed requests, and allow HR managers to keep track of request activities. Make sure to include a field for the reason for the request. This could help you resolve conflicts as well as make sure you’re complying with The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).

3. Make a Vacation Calendar

By creating a calendar accessible either electronically or on paper, that shows approved requests, can help employees plan accordingly to avoid conflicts. If you find employees monopolizing holiday time off by requesting it too far in advance you might consider opening up the calendar by quarters. Even well-planned strategies can’t accommodate unexpected time off, such as medical or bereavement leaves.

Back To Top

4. Offer Incentives

Consider offering employees incentives for working during periods where vacation requests are at their peak. This might be rewarding them with bonuses or 1-2 extra days off during off-peak times of the year. Even better, ask your employees what incentives they might be interested in. Employees will appreciate the opportunity to be listened to.

5. Allow Employees to Swap

As long as the PTO policy is clear and you’ve been transparent about the needs of the business during that time, empowering employees to work together to trade or swap out days off can help reduce chaos. Be clear it’s expected that swaps should be worked out fairly and amicably but be prepared to step in to help with resolution if necessary.

Conclusion

Holidays are some of the most anticipated time of the year. You can avoid most vacation request nightmares by:

  • Having a clearly written and shared PTO policy
  • Providing a standardized way to request PTO
  • Creating a visible vacation calendar to allow employees to proactively avoid conflicts
  • Empowering employees to trade/swap
  • Offering incentives to reward employees willing to work on holiday

Back To Top

Compliance can weigh down even the most experienced professionals. Our HR Advisors, one click compliance Handbook ,Compliance Database, HR Tools and Employee Training are ready to help navigate HR all year long. Everything included with your AllMyHR™ Solutions

tryhris HR Solutions guarantee and signature

Previous Labor Laws & Information

Employment Law Updates: November 2020

Federal Law Updates: November 2020

Three Federal along with D.C and fourteen State Law Updates have been issued.  Our HR Advisors are versed and ready to answer your toughest HR questions to help your company through working remotely, coming back to work and all year long.

November 2020 State Law Alerts

Labor Law Updates for November 2020

1

Federal Contractor Minimum Wage Rate for 2021

Increase in minimum wage rates effective January 1, 2021.

Effective January 1, 2021, the applicable minimum wage rate for workers performing work on or in connection with federal contracts covered by Executive Order 13658 increases to $10.95 per hour. Additionally, the required minimum cash wage for tipped employees performing work on or in connection with covered contracts increases to $7.65 per hour.

2

Form I-9 Flexibility Extended to December 31, 2020

Annother extension to the flexibility rules for Form I-9 compliance.

On November 18, 2020, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) announced another extension to the Employment Eligibility Verification (Form I-9) flexibility rule, which was extended to December 31, 2020, because of COVID-19 and the need for precautions. This flexibility rule, applicable only to remote workplaces, defers the physical presence requirement for in-person verification of the Form I-9 identity and employment eligibility documentation. However, the flexibility rule does not apply if there are employees physically present at the workplace. If there are employees physically present, then an employer must verify their Form I-9 identity and employment eligibility documentation in-person.

On March 19, 2020, the DHS first announced that the physical presence requirements were deferred due to COVID-19. The DHS and ICE websites provide additional updates about when the extensions will end and when normal operations will resume.

3

DOL and New FLSA Opinion Letters

DOL announces new opinion letters addressing compliance related to FLSA.

On November 3, 2020, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) announced the following new opinion letters that address compliance issues related to the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA): 

  • FLSA2020-15: Addressing the compensability of time that employees spend attending voluntary training programs in certain situations.
  • FLSA2020-16: Addressing compensability of employee travel time in certain situations involving construction sites located away from the employer’s principal place of business.

An opinion letter is an official, written opinion by the DOL’s Wage and Hour Division (WHD) on how a particular law applies in specific circumstances.

Individual state labor laws

State Specific Labor Law Updates:

Compliance can weigh down even the most experienced professionals. Our HR Advisors, one click compliance Handbook ,Compliance Database, HR Tools and Employee Training are ready to help navigate HR all year long. Everything included with your AllMyHR™ Solutions

tryhris HR Solutions guarantee and signature

Previous Labor Laws & Information

Employment Law Updates: October 2020

Federal Law Updates: October 2020

Five Federal along with eight State Law Updates have been issued.  Our HR Advisors are versed and ready to answer your toughest HR questions to help your company through working remotely, coming back to work and all year long.

October 2020 Law Alerts 7 states

Labor Law Updates for October 2020

1

DOL Releases FFCRA Eligibility Tool

Tool to assist employers and employees on determining eligibility for certain types of leave.

In October 2020, the federal Department of Labor released a Families First Coronavirus Relief Act (FFCRA) eligibility webtool for employees to determine their eligibility for paid sick leave or paid expanded family and medical leave. The webtool will also assist employers in determining their obligations to provide paid sick leave or paid expanded family and medical leave. The employer webtool is still being developed.

2

COLA Increase for 2021

The Social Security Administration announced a cost-of-living adjustment.

On October 13, 2020, the Social Security Administration announced the following for January 2021:

  • The cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) will increase by 1.3 percent; and
  • The maximum amount of earnings subject to the Social Security tax (taxable maximum) will increase to $142,800 from $137,700.

Read the full announcement on the Social Security Administration’s site.

3

FAQs for Executive Order 13950 – Federal Contractors Combating Race and Sex Stereotyping

U.S. Department of Labor issued the following FAQs for Executive Order 13950.

4

CDC Guidance for Flu Season and COVID-19

The CDC updated it’s “The Difference between the Flu and COVID-19 page.

On October 6, 2020, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) updated it’s The Difference between the Flu and COVID-19 page and addresses the following:

  • Signs and symptoms;
  • How long symptoms appear after exposure and infection;
  • How long someone can spread the virus;
  • How it spreads;
  • People at high-risk for severe illness;
  • Complications;
  • Approved treatments; and
  • Vaccine.

On October 7, 2020, CDC also updated its Influenza (Flu) Resources page that contains the following materials for businesses and employers:

  • Flu clinic and flu prevention communication tools;
  • Education and flu prevention messages; and
  • Tools for essential workers.

5

IRS Extends Due Date for Health Coverage Forms Due Date and Other Relief

The Internal Revenue Service announced extensions on certain forms to be provided to individuals.

On October 2, 2020, the Internal Revenue Service announced (Notice 2020-76) that employers, insurers, and other providers of minimum essential coverage have until March 2, 2021 (instead of January 31, 2021) to provide the following 2020 forms to individuals:

  • Form 1095-B, Health Coverage; and
  • Form 1095-C, Employer-Provided Health Insurance Offer and Coverage, which is filed by Applicable Large Employers (ALEs).

The extension is automatic, no request required, but employers and other coverage providers are encouraged to furnish 2020 information statements as soon as they can. The notice does not extend the due date for filing the 2020 Forms 1094-B, 1095-B, 1094-C, or 1095-C with the IRS.

The notice also provides a final extension for ALEs from penalties under 26 U.S.C. §§ 6721 and 6722 for incorrect or incomplete information if they can prove their good-faith efforts to comply with Form 1095-C:

  • § 6721 imposes a penalty for the failure to file correct information returns; and
  • § 6722 imposes a penalty for the failure to furnish correct payee statements.

Individual state labor laws

State Specific Labor Law Updates:

Compliance can weigh down even the most experienced professionals. Our HR Advisors, one click compliance Handbook ,Compliance Database, HR Tools and Employee Training are ready to help navigate HR all year long. Everything included with your AllMyHR™ Solutions

tryhris HR Solutions guarantee and signature

Previous Labor Laws & Information

Part III: Manager Guidelines

Part III: Manager Guidelines

Given a particularly divisive political climate in the United States, many companies are grappling with whether and how to attempt to limit conversations about politics in the workplace. Some companies are also interested in channeling 2020 Election Day energy into supporting voter turnout efforts and providing nonpartisan voter education information and resources. This three-part blog series explains what employers and managers can do and what pitfalls they need to avoid.

We began this three-part blog series with Part I: Managing Workplace Political Conversations followed by Part II: Voting Leave.

Part III: Manager Guidelines

In whatever way an employer decides to address workplace political discussion and voting leave, communication around manager expectations is key. Consider guiding managers to:

  • Unify their team as much as possible while making space for different perspectives.
  • If differing political beliefs create tension, help employees separate the person from their politics by getting to know one another’s hobbies, pets, family, or life goals.
  • Ground discussions in company values or strategic goals instead of political persuasion. For example, “The company believes racial justice is a human rights issue and aligns with our desire to create an inclusive workplace.”
  • Limit discussion of their own political beliefs to avoid an appearance of favoritism for team members with similar beliefs.
  • Monitor team discussions and climate, helping to redirect conversations as needed.
  • Know the applicable state voting leave requirements and be as flexible as possible in allowing time off to vote.
  • Follow company policy related to social media engagement with team members and colleagues.
  • Avoid getting involved in employees’ off-the-clock political lives unless it has a connection to work or violates a company policy. Concerns about off-duty political activities should be brought to HR for guidance.
  • Do not attempt to influence employees’ political decisions or ask whom they voted for.
  • Do not take adverse actions, threaten, or retaliate against employees for how they vote or their political beliefs.

Conclusion

Political elections always tend to stir the pot in any conversation be it with family, friends or co-workers. Freedom of speech is part of what makes being an American so awesome.

In Part I: Managing Workplace Political Conversations we discussed what kind of latitude a private employer has to limit political expression in the workplace. Employers stance could range from most permissive to most restrictive, with each stance having both pros and cons.

Part II: Voting Leave discussed how voting policy can vary from state to state, with a majority of states requiring that employees be given time off to vote. We encourage employers to go above and beyond the bare minimum requirements, especially during this unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic.

Finally, it’s up to the manager to communicate clearly and effectively whatever policy and stance the company decides to take regarding political conversations in the workplace. While not every employee may agree with the stance, they can get behind and respect a company that is transparent, clear and promotes respect in the workplace.

Compliance can weigh down even the most experienced professionals. Our HR Advisors, one click compliance Handbook ,Compliance Database, HR Tools and Employee Training are ready to help navigate HR all year long. Everything included with your AllMyHR™ Solutions

tryhris HR Solutions guarantee and signature

Read the first two parts to this three-part blog series on politics in the workplace.

>> Part I: Managing Workplace Political Conversations | >> Part II: Voting Leave

Previous Labor Laws & Information

Part II: Voting Leave

Part II: Voting Leave

Given a particularly divisive political climate in the United States, many companies are grappling with whether and how to attempt to limit conversations about politics in the workplace. Some companies are also interested in channeling 2020 Election Day energy into supporting voter turnout efforts and providing nonpartisan voter education information and resources. This three-part blog series explains what employers and managers can do and what pitfalls they need to avoid.

We began this series with Part I: Managing Workplace Political Conversations.

Part II: Voting Leave

It comes as a surprise to many employers that a majority of states require that employees be given time off to vote, and in many cases, that time must be paid.

While we encourage employers to go above and beyond the bare minimum in any given year, the pandemic makes added flexibility especially important and helpful this year. Those who plan to vote on November 3 may face numerous challenges, including long lines, extended travel to dropbox locations, and kids who need supervision during the day. Even where it is possible to vote by mail or absentee ballot, experts anticipate that many people will still want to vote in person, so it is important not to assume that everyone can or should vote by mail. 

Employers can do their part to encourage voting participation by removing obstacles at work.
And chances are those actions will pay dividends. A July 2018 Global Strategy Group survey found that 76 percent of people were more likely to work for a company that promoted democracy, 81 percent were more likely to buy that company’s products or services, and 81 percent were more likely to recommend the company to their friends or family.

Ways to Facilitate Voting

The most generous approach to encourage voting is making Election Day a paid holiday. This will maximize employees’ ability to vote without concern over lost income. However, this is not an option for many businesses, so employers may consider some of the following alternatives:

  • Make Election Day a no-meetings day. Any meetings that are already scheduled should be rescheduled.
  • Make Election Day a meeting-light day. Move meetings to allow the most time for voting and shorten meeting agendas.
  • Work with managers to accommodate absences due to voting.
  • Provide as much paid time off as an employee reasonably needs to vote (even if it is not required by law).
  • Trust employee estimates of how much time is reasonable or sufficient. Anticipate long lines. • Be flexible and plan for last-minute voting leave requests.

Back To Top

Voter Compliance

Voter Education and Civic Engagement

Employers can help employees to be well informed of their state voting requirements and procedures  and can take steps to promote civic engagement. Suggestions for this extra step include: 

  • Provide nonpartisan information about voting processes and procedures in the state(s) where the company operates. There are many resources for this online. Choose a credible, nonpartisan  source to share. 
  • Provide links to nonpartisan sites with information on how to volunteer as a poll worker or  otherwise be involved with helping ensure a safe and smooth election process. 
  • Encourage employees to explore early voting options where applicable. 
  • Provide paid time off (volunteer time off) for voting-related volunteer activities such as being a  poll worker. 


A few things
not to do:

  • Attempt to influence the political decisions of employees (e.g., by saying, “Our business won’t  survive if candidate X gets elected.” or “If you want to have a job, vote for candidate Y.”) Provide partisan information to employees. 
  • Force any employee or group of employees to participate in any political discussion, even if it  seems nonpartisan. 
  • Ask employees how they voted. 
  • Take adverse actions, threaten, or retaliate against employees for how they vote or for their  political beliefs. 

Back To Top

Compliance can weigh down even the most experienced professionals. Our HR Advisors, one click compliance Handbook ,Compliance Database, HR Tools and Employee Training are ready to help navigate HR all year long. Everything included with your AllMyHR™ Solutions

tryhris HR Solutions guarantee and signature

Previous Labor Laws & Information

Part I: Managing Political Conversations

Managing Political Conversations
Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn

Given a particularly divisive political climate in the United States, many companies are grappling with whether and how to attempt to limit conversations about politics in the workplace. Some companies are also interested in channeling 2020 Election Day energy into supporting voter turnout efforts and providing nonpartisan voter education information and resources. This three-part blog series explains what employers and managers can do and what pitfalls they need to avoid.

Part I: Managing Workplace Political Conversations

A private employer generally has wide latitude to limit political expression in the workplace provided they do not run afoul of protected activity under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) or applicable state laws. However, it is nearly impossible to limit all political conversation in the workplace, and any attempt to do so may hurt morale or employee engagement. At the same time, without guidelines, political conversations can quickly become disruptive and devolve into activity that is not in line with company policies or behavioral expectations. Here are approaches to consider for dealing with political expression in the workplace; the right approach will ultimately depend on the employer’s specific situation and culture.

Table of Contents

Most Permissive: Allowing Political Discussion

Where a work environment has well-established norms around upholding an inclusive culture and respectful treatment of colleagues, an employer can often trust staff to be mindful of how they engage on hot button topics and address any related issues on an as-needed basis. However, given how divisive things are now, even if a company has laid the groundwork to ensure their culture is civil and respectful, it may prove useful to communicate some ground rules ahead of the election.
There is no way to guarantee that employees engage with civility, compassion, and measured language. An employer can, however, help set the stage by:

  • Acknowledging that regardless of political party or beliefs, tensions are running high, and many team members may be feeling stress or fear related to the upcoming election.
  • Reminding employees that the workplace is a place where everyone should feel safe, welcomed, respected, and included.
  • Reminding managers that they should not assume that all employees share the same political beliefs.
  • Communicating to employees that the company does not want to limit healthy dialogue about important social issues, but it also has a vested interest in reducing disruptions and maintaining a culture of respect.
  • Redistributing company harassment, discrimination, and general conduct policies.
  • Prohibiting comments about candidates (or anyone else) that are discriminatory or harassing based on the candidates’ or their supporters’ race, sex, national origin, religion, color, age, disability, or any other legally protected characteristic.
  • Reminding employees that too much personal conversation of any kind can interfere with performance expectations. Even where an exchange is only a few minutes long, if it is divisive or disrespectful, it could result in a loss of productivity and damage to morale.
  • Encouraging employees to be mindful of how and when they engage in conversation on political topics. Some people enjoy talking politics while others find it stressful and do not want to engage in political conversation at work.
  • Encouraging employees to approach these conversations from a place of curiosity. Employees should attempt to understand the viewpoints of others, accepting that they may not find common ground. Conversation should be seen as an opportunity for better understanding, not a means to change someone’s mind.
  • Setting guidelines for managers related to the election and political conversations, such as the ones at the end of this guide.

Back To Top


Middle Ground: Prohibiting Certain Behaviors

Employers may want to limit but not eliminate the possibility of political discourse in the workplace. In this case, it may be enough to spell out specific activities that are off limits. For example:

  • Distributing political materials in working areas or displaying campaign materials in employee workstations.
  • Talking about political candidates in front of customers, vendors, or other workplace visitors.
  • Discussing political candidates on company computers or internal communication channels (keep in mind that if employees are working from home, this will amount to a total ban).
  • Prohibiting solicitation of money or support for political candidates or causes during work time.

Employers should avoid singling out topics to be avoided, such as “No discussing Black Lives Matter.” It is likely to create employee morale issues and could even give rise to a discrimination claim. Even with a neutral policy, such as “No discussing religion,” employers need to ensure they are consistent in enforcement. If an employer only disciplined employees who were arguing about Judaism but not employees talking about Sunday’s Mass, it would be discriminatory. General polices of civility and respect are safer and more effective.

Employers taking the middle ground approach should also provide the guidelines presented above for the most permissive workplace and make sure they are familiar with Section 7, discussed below in the most restrictive workplace discussion.

Back To Top


Most Restrictive: Prohibiting Political Discussions  

An employer is within its rights to attempt to ban almost all political discussions in the workplace (the  exceptions are discussed below). That said, the risks of this approach are significant. A strict ban on  talking politics in the workplace risks sending a message that an employer does not trust employees to  use good judgment and engage with coworkers respectfully. It also fails to recognize the impact that  current political and social issues have on employees.  

Employers may also find it difficult to delineate what is considered political versus not political. What  one person might consider an over-politicized issue may be very personal to someone else. For instance,  prohibiting discussions about religious freedom, Black Lives Matter, and LGBTQ rights could feel like a prohibition on discussing an employee’s basic human experience. This can lead to feelings of exclusion  and can potentially fuel claims of discrimination.  

It is a common misconception that all speech is protected in all places, but the First Amendment right to  free speech only protects people from having their speech limited by the government. Private employers are free to regulate speech in almost any way that does not conflict with Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act.

Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act gives non-supervisory employees the right to discuss the  terms and conditions of their employment at any time, in any forum (e.g., the break room, the sidewalk,  Facebook, or Yelp). 

This includes discussing:  

  • How much money they make, including any opinions about how their pay is impacted by race,  national origin, sex, or their inclusion in any other protected class. 
  • Workplace safety, whether it relates to COVID-19, coming in to work during protests, specific  hazards, or anything else safety related. 
  • Employer-required or recommended personal protective equipment. 
  • Treatment from management. 
  • Shift assignments. 
  • Anything related to unionizing. 

While this law protects some political activities, it does not give employees the right to discuss politics  that are not work-related during work hours.  

Employers that intend to limit workplace conversations should learn about Section 7 of the NLRA since it  is easy to violate if its protections are not fully understood. Employers should make it clear in their  communications that the company does not prohibit conversations that would be protected under the  NLRA and does not limit employees’ ability to engage in off-duty political activities, but may investigate  off-duty conduct that violates company policy. 

Stayed Tuned for Part II: Voting Leave, coming soon.

Compliance can weigh down even the most experienced professionals. Our HR Advisors, one click compliance Handbook ,Compliance Database, HR Tools and Employee Training are ready to help navigate HR all year long. Everything included with your AllMyHR™ Solutions

tryhris HR Solutions guarantee and signature
Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn

Previous Labor Laws & Information