(Podcast) California Employment News: SB848 – Protected Leave for Reproductive Loss
California Employment News: SB848 – Protected Leave for Reproductive Loss
California Employment News: Fundamentals of the California Family Rights Act (CFRA)
Primer for Nonprofits on Paid Employees, Volunteers, and Interns
The Friday and Monday Leave Act or the Family and Medical Leave Act: FMLA, Part 1
Webinar | Understanding the Families First Coronavirus Response Act
Employer Planning for Coronavirus
Employment Law Now: IV-51 - A New 2020 Vision
HR Law 101 Ep. 10: Are You Aware of the Family Medical Leave Act? Part 1
HR Law 101 Ep. 8: Handbooks and What to Include Part 3
I-13 – Policies, Policies, Policies, and Microchips Embedded in Employees
Negotiating the Maze of Overlapping Leave Laws
“You Want More Time Off?” – Dealing with Employees’ Medical Leave Requests Under the FMLA and ADA
California employers know that the new year inevitably brings new workplace laws that are finalized at the end of the state’s legislative session in the fall. This year, state lawmakers considered over 2,700 bills – the most...more
Although arbitrators in Canada have considered whether an employer in a unionized workplace can place an employee on unpaid leave for failing to comply with its mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policy, the British Columbia...more
On November 12, 2021, in Ontario Power Generation and The Power Worker Union (OPG), Arbitrator John C. Murray considered issues relating to a Vaccinate or Test Policy (Policy) that provided, among other things, that if...more
The California Legislature passed and Governor Newsom signed several new laws covering topics ranging from COVID-19 to leaves of absence to data reporting. Most of these laws take effect January 1, so now is a good time for...more
The New Year brings new laws for Illinois employers. Some laws go into effect this Summer, while others are effective as of this month. For employers who have not yet revised handbooks, policies and agreements, the time is...more
AB 465 was vetoed. This bill sought to bar mandatory employment arbitration agreements. This would have caused lawsuits to increase and would have driven up litigation costs for California’s employers. In vetoing AB 465,...more