In this issue: New California Statutes Add to Employer Obligations; Employee Fails to Establish Sexual Harassment Based on Isolated Events; Federal Court, Not California PUC, Must Decide Whether SuperShuttle Drivers Are Employees Or Independent Contractors; Frequently Absent Employee Fails To Establish Disability Discrimination; and California Supreme Court To Issue Ruling In Brinker Within 90 Days.

Excerpt from "New California Statutes...":

Following up on new California statutes covered in last month’s FEB Update, Governor Brown approved several additional laws that take effect January 1, 2012 and add to employer obligations:

AB 469 requires employers to provide non-exempt employees at the time of hire with a notice specifying among other things (1) the rate and basis of pay of the employee’s wages (e.g., hourly, salary, commission or other method, including rates of overtime pay); (2) the employer’s regular paydays; (3) the name, address, and telephone number of the employer; and (4) the name, address and telephone number of the employer’s worker’s compensation carrier. Employers must also notify employees of any change in the rate or basis of pay in writing within 7 calendar days of the change, unless changes are reflected on a timely wage statement (i.e., a pay stub issued within 7 days of the change) or other timely written notice.

AB 469 also creates a new statutory remedy for restitution of unpaid wages when an employer fails to pay wages fixed by a wage order, and makes it a misdemeanor for an employer to willfully violate wage statutes or orders. Finally, the statute extends the statute of limitations from the current one year to three years in which to commence an action to collect statutory penalties or fees.