加州最高法院倾向支持第22号提案：零工工人或继续作为独立承包商加州最高法院似乎对否决选民对第 22 号提案的意见犹豫不决，该提案是一项允许共享单车公司将司机归类为独立承包商的投票倡议。大法官们在口头辩论中的提问方式表明，可能会寻求妥协，而不是完全宣布该法律无效。2020 年，58% 的选民通过了第 22 号提案，但该提案一直面临着法律挑战，其命运可能会对加州临时工的分类和福利产生重大影响。
The California Supreme Court appears hesitant to overrule voters on Proposition 22, a ballot initiative allowing ride-share companies to classify drivers as independent contractors. The justices' line of questioning during oral arguments suggested a compromise might be sought, rather than fully invalidating the law. Proposition 22, passed by 58% of voters in 2020, has faced ongoing legal challenges and its fate could significantly impact gig workers' classification and benefits in California.
加州最高法院在审理第22号提案（Prop. 22）时显得犹豫，似乎不愿推翻这项由选民在2020年通过的提案。第22号提案允许网约车公司如优步和Lyft将司机归类为独立承包商，而不是雇员。这项提案自成为法律以来，一直面临法律挑战，包括被一名高等法院法官裁定违宪，随后又被上诉法院维持原判。现在，加州最高法院正在审理这项提案是否与州议会执行完整工人赔偿系统的宪法权力相冲突。
在听取口头辩论时，法官们的提问表明，他们可能在寻求一种折中方案，而不是完全废除这项法律。首席大法官帕特里夏·格雷罗问到，议员是否可以恢复零工工人的工人赔偿，而副大法官古德温·刘则指出，选民提案的权力是否等同于立法权力，是否意味着选民在工人赔偿领域完全无权行动。
代表SEIU加州和四名零工工人的律师斯科特·克朗兰德强调，第22号提案与议会的无限权力相冲突。而代表零工公司的律师杰弗里·费舍尔则认为，宪法允许选民对任何主题采取行动，甚至可以通过提案取消工人赔偿，但他认为这距离实际情况还很远。
零工工人团体的一些成员在法庭外举行了集会，呼吁支持零工工人的权益。提案的支持者如贝区司机科拉·曼达帕特则表示，她依赖于提案中的一些规定，比如保证最低工资120%的收入，而反对者如埃德·卡拉斯科则认为法官们似乎在寻找修改提案的方法，以便让零工工人可以在某些情况下获得工人赔偿。
最高法院的七位法官将在90天内作出决定，这一决定可能会改变加州的零工经济。如果第22号提案被推翻，零工公司将受到2019年通过的第5号法案（Assembly Bill 5）的约束，这可能会要求公司为他们的140万名工人支付雇佣税，并提供额外的福利，如病假工资和超时工资。
反对第22号提案的人指出，零工工人的薪酬和福利仍然存在问题。加州大学伯克利分校劳工中心的一项研究显示，扣除费用后，网约车司机的平均时薪为7.12美元，而送货工人为5.93美元。包括小费在内，司机的平均时薪为9.09美元，送货工人为13.62美元。
这一裁决不仅会影响加州，还可能对其他地方的相关立法和条例产生影响。例如，最近在明尼苏达州，立法者通过了一项法案，设定了网约车司机的最低工资标准，而这些公司威胁要退出该州。
Employees
2024年05月22日
Employees
EEOC Issues Final Regulation on Pregnant Workers Fairness Act美国平等就业机会委员会（EEOC）发布了《怀孕工作者公平法案》（PWFA）的最终规则，该规则自2023年6月27日生效，要求15名以上员工的雇主为怀孕、分娩或相关医疗条件的员工提供合理的工作调整，除非这种调整给雇主带来过大困难。此规则进一步加强了1964年民权法案和美国残疾人法案下的保护措施，提供了关于合理调整、雇主责任及孕期工作者权利的更清晰指导。
Aids Implementation of Civil Rights Law Expanding Protections and Accommodations for Pregnant Workers
WASHINGTON -- The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) today issued a final rule to implement the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA), providing important clarity that will allow pregnant workers the ability to work and maintain a healthy pregnancy and help employers understand their duties under the law. The PWFA requires most employers with 15 or more employees to provide “reasonable accommodations,” or changes at work, for a worker’s known limitations related to pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions, unless the accommodation will cause the employer an undue hardship.
The PWFA builds upon existing protections against pregnancy discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and access to reasonable accommodations under the Americans with Disabilities Act. The EEOC began accepting charges of discrimination on June 27, 2023, the day on which the PWFA became effective.
The final rule will be published in the Federal Register on Apr. 19. The final rule was approved by majority vote of the Commission on Apr. 3, 2024, and becomes effective 60 days after publication in the Federal Register.
The final rule and its accompanying interpretative guidance reflect the EEOC’s deliberation and response to the approximately 100,000 public comments received on the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. It provides clarity to employers and workers about who is covered, the types of limitations and medical conditions covered, how individuals can request reasonable accommodations, and numerous concrete examples.
“The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act is a win for workers, families, and our economy. It gives pregnant workers clear access to reasonable accommodations that will allow them to keep doing their jobs safely and effectively, free from discrimination and retaliation,” said EEOC Chair Charlotte A. Burrows. “At the EEOC, we have assisted women who have experienced serious health risks and unimaginable loss simply because they could not access a reasonable accommodation on the job. This final rule provides important information and guidance to help employers meet their responsibilities, and to jobseekers and employees about their rights. It encourages employers and employees to communicate early and often, allowing them to identify and resolve issues in a timely manner.”
Highlights from the final regulation include:
· Numerous examples of reasonable accommodations such as additional breaks to drink water, eat, or use the restroom; a stool to sit on while working; time off for health care appointments; temporary reassignment; temporary suspension of certain job duties; telework; or time off to recover from childbirth or a miscarriage, among others.
· Guidance regarding limitations and medical conditions for which employees or applicants may seek reasonable accommodation, including miscarriage or still birth; migraines; lactation; and pregnancy-related conditions that are episodic, such as morning sickness. This guidance is based on Congress’s PWFA statutory language, the EEOC’s longstanding definition of “pregnancy, childbirth, and related medical conditions” from Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and court decisions interpreting the term “pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions from Title VII.
· Guidance encouraging early and frequent communication between employers and workers to raise and resolve requests for reasonable accommodation in a timely manner.
· Clarification that an employer is not required to seek supporting documentation when an employee asks for a reasonable accommodation and should only do so when it is reasonable under the circumstances.
· Explanation of when an accommodation would impose an undue hardship on an employer and its business.
· Information on how employers may assert defenses or exemptions, including those based on religion, as early as possible in charge processing.
More information about the PWFA and the EEOC’s final rule, including resources for employers and workers, is available on the EEOC’s “What You Should Know about the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act” webpage.
For more information on pregnancy discrimination, please visit https://www.eeoc.gov/pregnancy-discrimination.
The EEOC prevents and remedies unlawful employment discrimination and advances equal opportunity for all. More information is available at www.eeoc.gov. Stay connected with the latest EEOC news by subscribing to our email updates.
温馨提示：加州雇主必须在 2024 年 2 月 14 日之前通知员工竞业禁止无效
作为NACSHR专业社群，让您的全球受众了解就业法律的重大变化非常重要，尤其是在美国这样的主要经济体。加利福尼亚州关于非竞争协议的最新进展就是一个很好的例子。以下是可能与您的读者相关的摘要和要点：
法律的主要变化：自 2024 年 1 月 1 日起，加州几乎所有形式的员工竞业禁止协议和条款都将失效。这是就业法的重大转变，反映出美国限制非竞争协议可执行性的趋势日益明显。
雇主义务：从 2024 年 1 月 1 日起，加州雇主有 44 天的时间通知所有现任和前任员工（在过去两年内受雇并签订过竞业禁止协议的员工）这一变化。通知必须告知员工，之前的任何竞业禁止协议现已失效。
通知方式：雇主必须通过邮件和电子邮件发送此通知，确保所有受影响的员工都能充分知晓。
违规处罚：未遵守通知要求的雇主可能会面临每次最高 2,500 美元的处罚。这强调了遵守新法规的重要性。
执法：虽然这项新法规的执行主要由加州总检察长和其他政府检察官负责，但从加州起诉违反非竞争协议行为的历史来看，雇主最好采取积极主动的态度。
全球影响：对于全球人力资源专业人士而言，了解这些变化至关重要，尤其是对于在加州开展业务的跨国公司而言。这一发展可能会影响雇佣合同谈判和人力资源实践。
这些信息对您的读者至关重要，可帮助他们深入了解重要司法管辖区不断演变的就业法律，并强调随时更新国际人力资源法律要求的重要性。
WHAT’S THE IMPACT?
Employers must send notices to the last known mailing and email address of every current and former employee who worked under a non-compete after January 1, 2022.
The notice must state that any noncompete to which the employee was bound is now void.
Failure to comply with the Valentine’s Day deadline will trigger Unfair Competition Law penalties up to $2500 per violation.
As an HR professional and editor, it's important to keep your global audience informed about significant changes in employment laws, especially in major economies like the United States. The recent development in California regarding non-compete agreements is a prime example. Here's a summary and key points that might be relevant for your readers:
Key Change in Law: As of January 1, 2024, California has invalidated nearly all forms of employee non-compete agreements and clauses. This is a significant shift in employment law, reflecting a growing trend in the U.S. towards limiting the enforceability of non-competes.
Employer Obligations: California employers now have a 44-day window, starting from January 1, 2024, to notify all current and former employees (who were employed in the last two years and had a non-compete agreement) about this change. The notification must inform employees that any previous non-compete agreements are now void.
Method of Notification: Employers are required to send this notification via mail and email, ensuring that all affected employees are adequately informed.
Penalties for Non-Compliance: Employers who fail to comply with this notification requirement could face penalties of up to $2,500 for each violation. This underscores the importance of adhering to the new regulation.
Enforcement: While enforcement of this new regulation is primarily the responsibility of the California Attorney General and other government attorneys, the state's history in prosecuting non-compete violations suggests a proactive approach from employers is advisable.
Global Implications: For HR professionals worldwide, understanding these changes is crucial, especially for multinational corporations with operations in California. This development could influence employment contract negotiations and HR practices.
This information could be vital for your readers, offering them insights into evolving employment laws in a key jurisdiction and highlighting the importance of staying updated with international HR legal requirements.
Employees
Employees
Employees
Employees
扫一扫
添加客服
