What’s New in HRAs of October 1st, 2015

Presented By

James A. Nys, SHRM-SCP, SPHR, MPAPersonnel Plus! Consulting Services

2015 Montana Legislature

General Employment Bills

• Unemployment Insurance– HB 306 increased the 10 week limit on UI benefits for victims of domestic

abuse to 28 weeks

•Hiring–SB 196 created a voluntary private sector Vets hiring preference–Some were concerned offering vets a preference might violate EEO law

•On the Job Treatment–HB 343 prohibits employers from requiring disclosure of social media passwords on personal devices but expressly allows access to devices issued by the employer

•Licensing–HB 147 establishes a nurse licensure compact that allows multi-state nurse licensing and exchange of information

• Overtime Exemptions– SB 270 adds ”an employee of a seasonal nonprofit establishment that is

an organized camp or religious or educational conference center” to the list of OT and minimum wage exemptions in Montana law

Worker’s Compensation

•HB 90 –Requires 14 notice of change of claims examiner

–Allows for receipt of vacation and PTO other than sick leave concurrently with TTG

–Changes Subsequent Injury fund assessment

–Decreases medical fee schedules to once a year

•HB 503–Loss information to be provided to policyholder on request

Worker’s Compensation

•HB 538 –Allows Montana employers to use NoDak Work Comp for MT employees working solely in North Dakota

•Commuting employees not included

•SB 123–Transfer regulatory authority and complaint processing to Insurance Commissioner

Federal Issues

Collective Bargaining- NLRB

• The NRLB’s new “Ambush election” rule became

effective mid-April 2015. It provides:

–Electronic Filing/Communications – Parties may file documents, such as

petitions, electronically,

–Election Voter List – The employer must include available personal email

addresses and phone numbers of voters on the voter list in order to permit

non-employer parties to communicate with prospective voters about the

upcoming election using modern forms of communication.

Ambush Election Rule

• Litigation of Eligibility and Inclusion Issues

– Generally, only issues necessary to determine whether an election should

be conducted will be litigated in a pre-election hearing.

– A regional director may defer litigation of eligibility and inclusion issues

affecting a small percentage of the appropriate voting unit to the post-

election stage if those issues do not have to be resolved in order to

determine if an election should be held.

– In many cases, those issues will not need to be litigated because they have

no impact on the results of the election.

Ambush Election Rule

• Earlier and more complete information to employees

– The employer is required to post a Notice of Petition for Election

containing more detailed information on the filing of the petition and

employee rights within two business days of the region’s service of the

petition

– Except in cases presenting unusually complex issues, pre-election

hearings will generally be set to open 8 days after a hearing notice is

served on the parties.

• Elections generally held in two weeks

Collective Bargaining- NLRB

• NLRB is modifying the current joint employer standard– For over 30 years, the NLRB has viewed direct and immediate control over

the same employees as joint employment– The NLRB has issued charges against franchises and McDonald’s USA,

LLC on the grounds that Mcdonald’s corporate requires franchisees to adhere to rules and regulations that there's no doubt who's really in charge.

Joint Employment Under NLRA

•On August 28th,  the National Labor Relations Board refined its standard for determining joint-employer status.

• In the decision, the Board decided that two or more entities are joint employers of a single workforce if

–(1) they are both employers within the meaning of the common law; and

–(2) they share or codetermine those matters governing the essential terms and conditions of employment.

–In evaluating whether an employer possesses sufficient control over employees to qualify as a joint employer, the Board will – among other factors -- consider whether an employer has exercised control over terms and conditions of employment indirectly through an intermediary, or whether it has reserved the authority to do so. 

•The Board found that BFI was a joint employer with Leadpoint, the company that supplied employees to BFI to perform various work functions for BFI, including cleaning and sorting of recycled products. In finding that BFI was a joint employer with Leadpoint, the Board relied on indirect and direct control that BFI possessed over essential terms and conditions of employment of the employees supplied by Leadpoint as well as BFI’s reserved authority to control such terms and conditions.

Purple Communications Decision

• Employees who have rightful access to their employer’s email system in the course of their work have a right to use the email system to engage in Section 7-protected communications on nonworking time. – Employers can justify a blanket ban on nonwork

time use of email only by demonstrating that “special circumstances make the ban necessary to maintain production or discipline.”

White Collar OT Regulations

• In summary, the DOL proposes to:–Set the minimum salary required for exemption at the 40% of weekly earnings for full-time salaried workers.  ($970 per week or $50,440 annually by the time a Final Rule is issued in 2016)

–Increase the annual compensation requirement for highly compensated employees (HCEs) to 90% of weekly earnings ($122,148 annually); and

–Establish a mechanism for automatically updating the salary levels annually–The Department seeks comments on the "possibility of including nondiscretionary bonuses to satisfy a portion of the standard salary requirement."

•  DOL also seeks comments on the following issues:–What, if any, changes should be made to the duties tests?–Should employees be required to spend a minimum amount of time performing work that is their primary duty in order to qualify for exemption? If so, what should that minimum amount be?

–Should the Department look to the State of California's law (requiring that 50% of an employee's time be spent exclusively on work that is the employee's primary duty) as a model? Is some other threshold that is less than 50% of an employee's time worked a better indicator of the realities of the workplace today?

–Does the single standard duties test for each exemption category appropriately distinguish between exempt and nonexempt employees? Should the Department reconsider our decision to eliminate the long/short duties tests structure?

–Is the concurrent duties regulation for executive employees (allowing the performance of both exempt and nonexempt duties concurrently) working appropriately or does it need to be modified to avoid sweeping nonexempt employees into the exemption? Alternatively, should there be a limitation on the amount of nonexempt work? To what extent are exempt lower-level executive employees performing nonexempt work?

–In addition, "the Department is also considering whether to add to the regulations examples of additional occupations to provide guidance" on "how the general executive, administrative, and professional exemption criteria may apply to specific occupations."   

SEC Whistleblowers

• The SEC has taken its first enforcement action against KBR for requiring that employees involved in internal investigations talk to legal before investigators.

Federal Contractors

•On September 11, 2015, the  Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) published its Final Rule on pay transparency in federal contracts.  

–The new rule prohibits federal contractors and subcontractors from discharging or discriminating against their employees and job applicants for discussing, disclosing or inquiring about their own “compensation” or that of another employee or applicant. 

–The new rule prohibits polices that prohibit or tend to restrict such discussions or inquiries. 

•The minimum wage for federal contractors will increase by 5 cents on January 1st.

US Supreme Court Cases

• Young v UPS- Pregnancy Discrimination– Denial of leave subject to ‘McDonald Douglas’ review

• Elauf v Abercrombie- – No need to request religious accommodation

• King v Burwell- • ACA Tax Credits available in all states

• Integrity Staffing v Busk- – Security screening not compensable work time

• Perez v Mortgage Bankers- – Change of interpretation does not require notice and comment

In the News

• Montana’s minimum wage will NOT increase in 2016.

•The Congress is considering legislation to change the definition of joint employment in an effort to override the NLRB

For More Information:• Jim Nys jnys@personnel-plus.com• Consider joining us tomorrow at the Holiday Inn for a

day of training