Another step forward for salary history laws
This week, Vermont became the latest state to ban employers from asking prospective employees about their salary history. When the law takes effect on July 1, employers will no longer be able to ask about a candidates current or past compensation, require that compensation to meet a minimum or maximum criteria or use that information to determine whether to interview a candidate.
Vermont joins seven other states and eight municipalities with salary-history ban laws on the books, but such laws also recently encountered a new roadblock: a federal judge in Philadelphia ruled recently that Philadelphia's salary-history law prohibiting employers to ask about previous salary was a violation of free speech. Employers can still ask, the judge ruled, but upheld the provision preventing employers from using that information in their decision to interview or hire a candidate.
Seattle's "head tax"
On Monday, the Seattle City Council approved a plan that would impose a "head tax" on employers generating $20 million or more in revenue each year. The tax would collect 26 cents per hour worked per employee for full-time employees at these companies, bringing in an average of $275 per employee, or a total of $47 million per year, according to Gizmodo.
The aim of the tax, which has been a point of debate for months, is to fund affordable housing and other services for homeless individuals. Seattle has the third-highest homeless population in the nation, which some attribute to the rapid economic growth caused by tech giants like Amazon, who, unsurprisingly, greatly opposed the new tax.
New York mandates sexual harassment policies
Businesses have been taking a hard, close look at their sexual harassment policies in the wake of the #MeToo movement, and if you're a New York-based employer, that proactive approach will make the next few months a little easier: as part of the recently passed state budget, anti-sexual harassment policies and training programs will now be mandatory.
The new policy will be rolled out in phases. Effective immediately are expanded protections for non-employees such as contractors, vendors and consultants. On July 11, companies will no longer be able to include mandatory arbitration clauses or non-disclosure clauses in settlements relating to sexual harassment claims. By October 9, companies must distribute specific written policies to their employees and begin to provide annual training, the specifics of which will be further defined in coming months.
Proposed Mental Health Parity rule changes
Ten years after the Mental Health Parity Act went into effect, mental health parity is still elusive. Recently, the Departments of Labor, Treasury and HHS took steps to change this, issuing new guidance clarifying how mental health parity applies to benefit packages.
The package includes an action plan set forth by HHS for greater enforcement of coverage and a fact sheet on current enforcement. A proposed FAQ sheet explores murky areas of mental health coverage, such as experimental or investigative treatments.
Discussing the joint-employer standard
On May 9, National Labor Relations Board chairman John Ring announced the agency is considering notice-and-comment rulemaking as the agency mulls revisions to the joint-employer standard. The joint-employer standard has been stuck in limbo since its inception in 2015, caught between an Obama-era ruling that broadened the definition of a joint employer and a now-Republican-controlled NLRB. At issue is who is considered and employer when two or more companies have control over an employee's terms of employment and daily work. A broader definition opened doors for employees to bargain with all parties that fell under the joint-employer definition, as well as increased the legal obligations of those companies to workers.
If the rulemaking process proceeds (it has the potential to be blocked), a final decision on the standard take even longer to reach.
Advertisement
Another step forward for salary history laws
This week, Vermont became the latest state to ban employers from asking prospective employees about their salary history. When the law takes effect on July 1, employers will no longer be able to ask about a candidates current or past compensation, require that compensation to meet a minimum or maximum criteria or use that information to determine whether to interview a candidate.
Vermont joins seven other states and eight municipalities with salary-history ban laws on the books, but such laws also recently encountered a new roadblock: a federal judge in Philadelphia ruled recently that Philadelphia's salary-history law prohibiting employers to ask about previous salary was a violation of free speech. Employers can still ask, the judge ruled, but upheld the provision preventing employers from using that information in their decision to interview or hire a candidate.
Seattle's "head tax"
On Monday, the Seattle City Council approved a plan that would impose a "head tax" on employers generating $20 million or more in revenue each year. The tax would collect 26 cents per hour worked per employee for full-time employees at these companies, bringing in an average of $275 per employee, or a total of $47 million per year, according to Gizmodo.
The aim of the tax, which has been a point of debate for months, is to fund affordable housing and other services for homeless individuals. Seattle has the third-highest homeless population in the nation, which some attribute to the rapid economic growth caused by tech giants like Amazon, who, unsurprisingly, greatly opposed the new tax.
New York mandates sexual harassment policies
Businesses have been taking a hard, close look at their sexual harassment policies in the wake of the #MeToo movement, and if you're a New York-based employer, that proactive approach will make the next few months a little easier: as part of the recently passed state budget, anti-sexual harassment policies and training programs will now be mandatory.
The new policy will be rolled out in phases. Effective immediately are expanded protections for non-employees such as contractors, vendors and consultants. On July 11, companies will no longer be able to include mandatory arbitration clauses or non-disclosure clauses in settlements relating to sexual harassment claims. By October 9, companies must distribute specific written policies to their employees and begin to provide annual training, the specifics of which will be further defined in coming months.
Proposed Mental Health Parity rule changes
Ten years after the Mental Health Parity Act went into effect, mental health parity is still elusive. Recently, the Departments of Labor, Treasury and HHS took steps to change this, issuing new guidance clarifying how mental health parity applies to benefit packages.
The package includes an action plan set forth by HHS for greater enforcement of coverage and a fact sheet on current enforcement. A proposed FAQ sheet explores murky areas of mental health coverage, such as experimental or investigative treatments.
Discussing the joint-employer standard
On May 9, National Labor Relations Board chairman John Ring announced the agency is considering notice-and-comment rulemaking as the agency mulls revisions to the joint-employer standard. The joint-employer standard has been stuck in limbo since its inception in 2015, caught between an Obama-era ruling that broadened the definition of a joint employer and a now-Republican-controlled NLRB. At issue is who is considered and employer when two or more companies have control over an employee's terms of employment and daily work. A broader definition opened doors for employees to bargain with all parties that fell under the joint-employer definition, as well as increased the legal obligations of those companies to workers.
If the rulemaking process proceeds (it has the potential to be blocked), a final decision on the standard take even longer to reach.
Advertisement
Another step forward for salary history laws
This week, Vermont became the latest state to ban employers from asking prospective employees about their salary history. When the law takes effect on July 1, employers will no longer be able to ask about a candidates current or past compensation, require that compensation to meet a minimum or maximum criteria or use that information to determine whether to interview a candidate.
Vermont joins seven other states and eight municipalities with salary-history ban laws on the books, but such laws also recently encountered a new roadblock: a federal judge in Philadelphia ruled recently that Philadelphia's salary-history law prohibiting employers to ask about previous salary was a violation of free speech. Employers can still ask, the judge ruled, but upheld the provision preventing employers from using that information in their decision to interview or hire a candidate.
© Touchpoint Markets, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more inforrmation visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
Emily Payne
Emily Payne is director, content analytics for ALM's Business & Finance Markets and former managing editor for BenefitsPRO. A Wisconsin native, she has spent the past decade writing and editing for various athletic and fitness publications. She holds an English degree and Business certificate from the University of Wisconsin.
