DOCSLIB.ORG

2014 Labor & Employment Seminar

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2014 Labor & Employment Seminar HANSON BRIDGETT PRESENTS: 2014 LABOR & EMPLOYMENT SEMINAR SAN FRANCISCO I SACRAMENTO Table of Contents Agenda and Contact Sheet 1 Morning Presentation Slides 2 Afternoon Presentation Slides 3 New Labor Laws 4 San Francisco Family Friendly Ordinance 5 2014 Labor Seminar Update Newsletter 6 Minimum Wage Notices 7 Form LM-10: Employer Form for Section 203 Reporting 8 Form LM-20: Agreement and Activities Report 9 September 20, 2011 American Hospital Association Letter to the DOL 10 September 21, 2011 American Council on Education Letter to the DOL 11 NLRB Advice Memorandum – May 30, 2012 12 Revenue Ruling 2013-17 13 IRS Notice 2013-61 14 IRS Notice 2014-1 15 Recently Published FAQs – SF Health Care Security Ordinance 16 PEPRA Update 17 New California Privacy Laws 2014 18 FTC: COPPA Guidance 19 FTC: Disposal Rule 20 Protecting Personal Information 21 FTC: System Security 22 Agenda 8:00 – 8:25 am Registration, Breakfast and Networking 8:25 – 8:30 am Introduction and Welcome 8:30 – 9:45 am New Obligations for Employers 9:45 – 10:00 am Break 10:00 – 11:15 am Emerging Trends 11:15 – 11:45 am Employee Benefits Update 11:45 – 12:30 pm Lunch 12:30 – 1:45 pm In-Depth Subject: Privacy Concerns Contact Information Edward Bernard Dorothy Liu [email protected] [email protected] 415.995.5807 415.995.5046 Judy Boyette Ray Lynch Chair, Employee Benefits [email protected] [email protected] 415.995.5055 415.995.5115 Mike Moye Angela Clements Chair, Labor & Employment [email protected] [email protected] 415.995.5094 415.995.5092 Jahmal Davis Diane Marie O'Malley [email protected] [email protected] 415.995.5815 415.995.5045 Kurt Franklin Lisa Pooley [email protected] [email protected] 415.995.5086 415.995.5051 Pat Glenn Sandy Rappaport [email protected] [email protected] 415.995.5047 415.995.5053 Anne Hydorn Gilbert Tsai [email protected] [email protected] 415.995.5893 415.995.5874 Molly Kaban [email protected] 415.995.5090 Tab 1 New Wage Obligations Presented By Sandy Rappaport, Partner Hanson Bridgett LLP T: 415-995-5053 New Wage Obligations • California’s minimum wage increase . $9/hour effective July 1, 2014 . $10/hour effective January 1, 2016 • Note impact on minimum salary for exempt employees . $37,440/year or $3,120/month effective July 1, 2014 . $41,600/year or $3,466.67/month effective January 1, 2016 • Check local ordinances . San Jose - $10.15/hour effective January 1, 2014 . San Francisco - $10.74/hour effective January 1, 2014 New Wage Obligations • Domestic Worker Bill of Rights – In-home personal attendants - those who care for children, elderly, or people with disabilities – Will receive overtime pay at 1.5x pay after 9 hours in a day and after 45 hours a week – Excluded: • Those who provide services through IHSS and DDS • Casual babysitters • Close family members • Babysitters under 18 – Note: new DOL regulations that will be effective 1/1/15 will apply the FLSA’s minimum wage and overtime provisions to more domestic service workers, including some excluded by the new state law 1 New Wage Obligations • Paid Family Leave wage-replacement benefits expanded – Covers time off to care for seriously ill grandparent, grandchild, sibling or parent-in-law – Does not create the right to a leave of absence – Effective July 1, 2014 – Employers must provide claim forms to any employee leaving work to provide care for one of these family members or for reasons previously covered by PFL Wage/Hour Review – Meal and Rest Break Claims Post- Brinker • Class certification – need substantial evidence of company- wide policy or practice that violates law • Legally-compliant written policy hard to overcome • Lack of policy can result in certification – shows failure to authorize meal and rest breaks • Bottom line: Have a legally-compliant written policy! New Leave / Work Schedule Obligations Presented By Dorothy Liu, Partner Hanson Bridgett LLP T: 415-995-5046 2 Leave For Reserve Peace Officers & Emergency Rescue Personnel (AB 11) • Requires employers to permit employees who are reserve peace officers and emergency rescue personal to take temporary leaves for training purposes. • Existing law already requires employers to permit such leaves for employees who are volunteer firefighters. Leave For Victims Of Domestic Violence (SB 400) • Extends certain existing employment protections for victims of domestic violence and sexual assault to victims of stalking. • Requires employers to provide stalking victims with time off to appear at legal proceedings and – for employers with 25 or more employees – to seek medical and psychological treatment. • Makes it unlawful to discriminate or retaliate against an employee because of his or her status as a victim of domestic violence, sexual assault or stalking. • Adds a new “reasonable accommodation” requirement for victims of domestic violence, sexual assault or stalking, which may include implementation of safety measures. Premium Pay For Missed “Recovery Periods” Under Cal/OSHA Regs (SB 435) • Amends California Labor Code section 226.7 to require an employer that does not provide an employee with a “recovery period” - defined as the “cool down period afforded an employee [under Cal/OSHA regulations] to prevent heat illness” - to pay one additional hour of pay for each workday that the recovery period is not provided. • Currently, section 226.7 requires employers to pay employees a penalty of one hour of pay for each workday that a meal or rest period is not provided. SB 435 expands this penalty to include “recovery periods.” 3 Paid Leave For Public Employee Union Reps (AB 1181) • Requires public agencies to give paid leaves of absence to employee representatives of employee organizations when they are testifying or serving as the employee organization’s representative in a PERB proceeding, or before a personnel or merit commission. San Francisco Family-Friendly Workplace Ordinance • The San Francisco Board of Supervisors passed the Family Friendly Workplace Ordinance (“FFWO”), which will require employers with 20 or more employees (regardless of location) to consider requests from San Francisco employees for “flexible or predictable working arrangements to assist with care giving responsibilities.” • The FFWO also protects employees from adverse action based on “caregiver status.” • The FFWO requires employers to post a notice informing employees of their rights under the ordinance. • The San Francisco Office of Labor Standards Enforcement will have responsibility for enforcing the ordinance. New FMLA Regs And Poster Requirements • The “Employee Rights and Responsibilities Under the Family and Medical Leave Act” poster was revised in Feb. 2013. Covered employers must post the revised notice. • Military Family Leave: Regs make changes to military family leave, including new parental care leave, expanding exigency leave for rest and recuperation, and placing new limits on exigency leave for child care and school activities. • Intermittent Leave: New regs clarify that employers must track intermittent FMLA leave using the smallest increment of time that the employer uses for other types of leave, but in no case may the increments be greater than one hour. Further, an employer may only count time actually taken as FMLA leave against an employee's FMLA entitlement. 4 Sanchez v. Swissport • Facts: Plaintiff was a female employee with a high-risk pregnancy who was terminated after exhausting the four months of leave entitlement under California’s Pregnancy Disability Leave (“PDL”) law. • Holding: Although she had exhausted her PDL, employee may still have viable discrimination claims under FEHA based on employer’s alleged failure to provide additional leave as a reasonable accommodation for her pregnancy- related disability. • Significance: FEHA allows a disabled employee to request additional leave as a reasonable accommodation so long as it poses no undue hardship on an employer. New Anti- Discrimination/Retaliation Obligations Presented By Lisa Pooley, Partner Jahmal Davis, Partner Hanson Bridgett LLP Hanson Bridgett LLP T: 415-995-5051 T: 415-995-5815 Sexual Harassment Definition Clarified in FEHA (SB 292) • Need NOT be motivated be sexual desire • Actionable sexual harassment can be statements and gestures that are: – Sexually crude – Offensive – Demeaning Example: same-sex harassment Anti-Harassment Training 5 New Protection for Military and Veterans in FEHA (AB 556) • “Military and Veteran Status” added to list of categories protected from employment discrimination • Covers member or veteran of: – U.S. Armed Forces; U.S. Armed Forces Reserve; U.S. National Guard; and California National Guard Exemption: May still identify members of military for purposes of awarding a veteran’s preference as permitted by law – Veteran’s preference “permitted by law” tend to be found in government contracting statutes New Protection for Military and Veterans in FEHA (AB 556) Consider: EEOC Guidance questions disparate impact on women due to veteran’s preference Update Job Applications Update Employment Policies and Handbooks Prohibition on Agencies Asking About Criminal Convictions on Job Applications (AB 218) (“Ban the Box”) • No request for disclosure of criminal convictions until after determination that applicant meets minimum qualifications • May conduct conviction history background check after determination of minimal qualifications has been made • Applies to State and Local Agencies
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ordinance No. 11-14 N.S. an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Richmond Amending Article Vii of the Municipal Code To
    ORDINANCE NO. 11-14 N.S. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND AMENDING ARTICLE VII OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO REQUIRE THE PAYMENT OF A CITY-WIDE MINIMUM WAGE ____________________________________________________________________ WHEREAS, families and workers need to earn a living wage, and public policies which help achieve that goal are beneficial; and WHEREAS, payment of a minimum wage advances the City of Richmond’s interest by creating jobs that help workers and their families avoid poverty and economic hardship and enable them to meet basic needs; and WHEREAS, payment of a minimum wage advances the City’s interest by improving the quality of services provided in the City to the public by reducing high turnover, absenteeism, and instability in the workplace; and WHEREAS, the current Federal and State hourly minimum wage are both below the minimum wage of 1979 in current dollars; and WHEREAS, the cost of living in the City of Richmond is estimated at 20% greater than the overall national average; and WHEREAS, households supported by a single full-time current minimum wage earner are at or below the official national poverty line; and WHEREAS, increasing the minimum wage increases consumer purchasing power, increases workers’ standards of living, reduces poverty, and stimulates the economy; and WHEREAS, the Chicago Federal Reserve Bank conducted a study in 2011 estimating that every dollar increase in the minimum wage results in $2,800 in new consumer spending by that household the following year, and this revenue is
    [Show full text]
  • Local Minimum Wage Ordinance November 2019)
    Local Minimum Wage Ordinance November 2019) Jurisdiction Ordinance Considered Community Outreach Ordinance Details Other Comments Atherton No, Atherton does not n/a n/a n/a have businesses in town – Jennifer Frew only residential and [email protected] schools. Belmont Yes, adopted 11/14/2017. Did not do a substantial amount of outreach for the City Based on Council direction to increase MW to $15 by 2020. 10/24 and 11/14 City Council staff reports Study Session on 10/24/17 Council actions beyond regular notification, and notifying the 7/1/2018: $12.50 per hour are good examples of how to organize Jennifer Rose, (Item 9A). Chamber of Commerce directly. Used other jurisdictions for 1/1/2019: $13.50 per hour information. Management Analyst II Action taken on examples, and tied increases to align with neighboring Cities by 1/1/2020: $15 per hour Belmont City Council was confident in their Housing & Economic 11/14/2017 (Item 9B) and 2021. 1/1/2021: $15.90 per hour position to accelerate MW going into this Development Finance 11/28/17 (Item 7F). Did do a substantial outreach effort once the Ordinance was 1/1/2022 and each following year: CPI up to 3.5% process so it was not controversial. Department adopted and prior to the first increase, including a direct All employers are subject to MW ordinance, and all https://www.belmont.gov/our- (650) 595-7453 mailer to the physical business address for all business license employees who work two or more hours entitled to MW.
    [Show full text]
  • City of San Mateo Minimum Wage Ordinance Frequently Asked Questions
    CITY OF SAN MATEO MINIMUM WAGE ORDINANCE FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS What is the City of San Mateo Minimum Wage Ordinance and how does this affect my business? The San Mateo City Council adopted an ordinance to create a City minimum wage. The ordinance requires employers that maintain a place of business in the City of San Mateo or perform any work/service within the City limits to pay the City’s minimum wage to its employees (as defined by State law). The ordinance went into effect on January 1, 2017. What is the Minimum Wage in the City of San Mateo? The minimum wage increases on January 1st of every year and is adjusted based on the regional Consumer Price Index (CPI). Starting on January 1, 2020, all employers are required to pay employees $15.38 per hour. Does the Minimum Wage apply elsewhere within the County of San Mateo? No, the City of San Mateo minimum wage only applies to employees who work within the geographic boundaries of the City of San Mateo. There are several Minimum Wage laws: Federal, State, and City of San Mateo. What is the difference and which one applies to local businesses? City of San Mateo employers are subject to Federal, State and San Mateo minimum wage laws. When there are conflicts in the laws, the employer must follow the strictest standard, meaning that employers must follow the standard that is most favorable to the employee. Since the City of San Mateo’s ordinance is higher than the State and Federal law, covered employers are required to pay the City’s minimum wage.
    [Show full text]
  • Minimum Wage Public Comment
    From: Martha Hage To: MinWage Subject: Oppose $15 Date: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 11:57:39 PM To whom it may concern: A reasonable minimum wage is $12. The only locations in the United States of America that have a minimum wage of $15 are the East Coast and the West Coast. The cost of living is significantly higher in those areas. The cost of living would increase in Minneapolis and force people out of our city. Businesses would move out of Minneapolis or close. As stated above, a reasonable minimum wage for Minneapolis is $12. Sincerely, Martha M. Hage [email protected] 612.339.4959 Sent from my iPad From: Dahler, Ken on behalf of Council Comment To: MinWage Subject: FW: Minimum Wage To the city council attached document Date: Thursday, June 22, 2017 7:26:10 PM Attachments: To the City Council.docx Ken Dahler l Council Committee Coordinator l City of Minneapolis – Clerk’s Office l 350 S. Fifth St. – Room 304 612-673-2607 l [email protected] From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 9:13 PM To: Council Comment Subject: Minimum Wage To the city council attached document Margaret Hastings, MA, LPCC,CEAP,SAP This is confidential information. If received in error, delete and call Margaret Hastings at ph. 952-457-2288 From: JJ Haywood To: Quincy, John Subject: Minneapolis Minimum Wage Date: Monday, June 19, 2017 8:29:03 PM Dear Council Member Quincy: I'm writing you requesting that the Council reconsider the phase in to the $15/hr minimum wage ordinance.
    [Show full text]
  • COVID-19 Vaccine Rollout and Mandatory Policies
    COVID-19 Vaccine Rollout and Mandatory Policies 1 Grant T. Collins (612) 373-8519 [email protected] Penelope J. Phillips (612) 373-8428 [email protected] 2 FDA Issues EUAs ▪ Pfizer ▪ EUA issued on Dec. 11, 2020 ▪ BLA application expected “in the first half of 2021” ▪ Moderna ▪ EUA issued on Dec. 18, 2020 ▪ BLA application expected “in the first half of 2021” ▪ Johnson & Johnson ▪ EUA issued on Feb. 27, 2021 ▪ CDC and FDA recommend “pause” on April 13, 2021 3 Vaccine Rollout 4 5 6 7 Vaccine Hesitancy Remains ▪ February 2021 Pew Research Poll: ▪ 69% said they would “definitely” or “probably” get a COVID-19 vaccine. ▪ 30% said they would “definitely” or “probably” not get the COVID-19 vaccine. 8 9 10 11 Planning for Employer Vaccination Policies 12 Educate and Engage Employees ▪ Prepare employees for your organization’s policies relating to the COVID-19 vaccine. ▪ Begin a process of educating and engaging employees about the vaccine, its efficacy, and safety. ▪ CDC has a “toolkit” for employers. 13 CDC Resources 14 CDC Resources(cont.) ▪ CDC’s provides: ▪ Sample letter to employees. ▪ Sample newsletter content. ▪ “Myths & Facts” regarding COVID-19 vaccine. ▪ V-Safe Program. 15 Vaccine Planning ▪ Survey your workforce about the vaccine. ▪ How many are going to voluntarily receive the vaccine? ▪ How many would like more information regarding the vaccine. ▪ Educate, educate, educate. 16 Avoid ADA Issues ▪ Vaccination Status Survey ▪ Not a medical inquiry per se, but survey should ensure that the individual does not explain “why” not receiving a vaccine. ▪ Warn employees not to provide any medical information. ▪ Employee’s response may be considered confidential medical information under ADA.
    [Show full text]
  • Workers' Rights for Workforce Development Total Time: 1 Hour, 30
    UNIT 3 – Wage and Hour Laws and Protection UNIT 3 Photograph by Robert L. Simpson Workers’ Rights for Workforce Development Total Time: 1 hour, 30 minutes Wage and Hour Laws & Protection I worked at a cleaning company where I would work for another person who was the one who had the contract. I only worked for her on weekends. One time I told her I couldn’t work and when I returned to work she told me that she no longer needed me and never paid me the last week I had worked. I felt abused, as this person only paid me what she wanted and when she wanted and only gave me work when it was convenient for her. I was without work whenever she wanted and she never paid me the $90 she owed me. – Job-seeking client, February 2015 Copyright UIUC Labor Education Program, 2015 3-1 Workers’ Rights for Workforce Development WORKERS’ RIGHTS FOR WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT Purpose Publication Date This curriculum is based on learning in social, cooperative and This Workers’ Rights for Workforce Development active ways, with students’ questions and concerns as the center Curriculum is current as of December 1, 2015. focus. The teacher is a facilitator who inspires students to analyze, look for equality, find history, and speak in a strong and informed Preferred Citation voice. Our goal is to help you, as workforce development staff, Authors: Alison Dickson, Sue Davenport, and engage your students in learning that they have rights and that Marsha Love. there are resources accessible to them for help in protecting Workers’ Rights for Workforce Development: A those rights.
    [Show full text]
  • City of San Carlos Minimum Wage Ordinance Frequently Asked Questions
    City of San Carlos Minimum Wage Ordinance Frequently Asked Questions What is the City of San Carlos Minimum Wage Ordinance and Who Does it Apply to? 1. What is the City of San Carlos Minimum Wage Ordinance and how does this affect my business? The San Carlos City Council adopted an Ordinance to establish a local minimum wage that applies to all employees working in San Carlos. The Ordinance requires employers that maintain a place of business or perform any work/service within San Carlos city limits pay the local minimum wage rage to its employees. The Ordinance is effective January 1, 2021. 2. What is the Minimum Wage in the City of San Carlos? Beginning January 1, 2021, the minimum wage is $15.00 per hour plus the annual change in Consumer Price Index at a maximum of 3.5% (maximum wage $15.53 per hour). The minimum wage will be adjusted annually on January 1 based on the regional Consumer Price Index (CPI) to a maximum of 3.5%. 3. There are several Minimum Wage laws: Federal, State, and City of San Carlos. What is the difference and which one applies to local businesses? City of San Carlos employers are subject to Federal, State and San Carlos minimum wage laws. When there are conflicts in the laws, the employer must follow the strictest standard, meaning that employers must follow the standard that is most favorable to the employee. Since the City of San Carlos’s minimum wage is higher than the State and Federal law, covered employers are required to pay the City’s minimum wage.
    [Show full text]
  • Seattle's Minimum Wage Increase
    NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES MINIMUM WAGE INCREASES, WAGES, AND LOW-WAGE EMPLOYMENT: EVIDENCE FROM SEATTLE Ekaterina Jardim Mark C. Long Robert Plotnick Emma van Inwegen Jacob Vigdor Hilary Wething Working Paper 23532 http://www.nber.org/papers/w23532 NATIONALBUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESESARCH 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge MA 02138 June 2017, Revised May 2018 We thank the state of Washington’s Employment Security Department for providing access to data, and Matthew Dunbar for assistance in geocoding business locations. We thank the Laura and John Arnold Foundation, the Smith Richardson Foundation, the Russell Sage Foundation, and the City of Seattle for funding and supporting the Seattle Minimum Wage Study. Partial support for this study came from a Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development research infrastructure grant, R24 HD042828, to the Center for Studies in Demography & Ecology at the University of Washington. We are grateful to conference session participants at the 2016 Association for Public Policy and Management, 2017 Population Association of America, and 2018 Allied Social Science Association meetings; to seminar participants at Columbia University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Montana State University, National University of Singapore, Stanford University, University of British Columbia, University of California-Irvine, University of Chicago, University of Houston, University of Pittsburgh, University of Rochester, and the World Bank; members and guests of the Seattle Economic Council, and to the Seattle City Council and their staff for helpful comments on previous iterations of this work. We also thank Sylvia Allegretto, David Autor, Marianne Bitler, David Card, Raj Chetty, Jeff Clemens, David Cutler, Arin Dube, Ed Glaeser, Hillary Hoynes, Kevin Lang, Thomas Lemieux, David Neumark, Michael Reich, Emmanuel Saez, Diane Schanzenbach, John Schmitt, and Ben Zipperer for discussions which enriched the paper.
    [Show full text]
  • C:\Documents and Settings\Mbrady\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLKAE\September.Wpd
    STATE BOARD OF REGENTS MEETING REGENTS’ OFFICES, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH SEPTEMBER 2007 Minutes Thursday, September 13, 2007 Regents Present Regents Excused Jed H. Pitcher, Chair Nolan E. Karras Bonnie Jean Beesley, Vice Chair Greg W. Haws Jerry C. Atkin Sara V. Sinclair Janet A. Cannon Rosanita Cespedes Amy Engh Katharine B. Garff Patti Harrington Meghan Holbrook James S. Jardine David J. Jordan Anthony Morgan Josh M. Reid Marlon O. Snow John H. Zenger Office of the Commissioner Richard E. Kendell, Commissioner Joyce Cottrell, Executive Secretary Amanda Covington, Communications Director Troy Caserta, Accounting Officer David S. Doty, Assistant Commissioner and Director of Policy Studies Brian S. Foisy, Assistant Commissioner for Financial Services Kimberly Henrie, Budget Director Nate Millward, Director of Internal Budget and Finance Phyllis C. Safman, Assistant Commissioner for Academic Affairs Mark H. Spencer, Associate Commissioner for Finance and Facilities Lucille T. Stoddard, Associate Commissioner for Academic Affairs Lynne S. Ward, Director, Utah Educational Savings Plan Darrell White, Special Assistant to the Commissioner for Public Affairs Gary S. Wixom, Assistant Commissioner for Academic Affairs INSTITUTIONAL REPRESENTATIVES University of Utah A. Lorris Betz, Senior Vice President for Health Sciences David W. Pershing, Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs James R. Bardsley, Associate Vice President for Finance and Planning, Health Sciences Paul T. Brinkman, Associate Vice President for Budget and Finance Arnold B. Combe, Vice President for Administrative Services Minutes of meeting State Board of Regents September 13-14, 2007 Page 2 John G. Francis, Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs Ray Lynch, Executive Director, Huntsman Cancer Hospital Mike Perez, Associate Vice President for Facilities Management Utah State University Fred R.
    [Show full text]
  • Raises from Coast to Coast in 2020: Minimum Wage Will Increase in Record-High 47 States, Cities, and Counties This January
    Raises From Coast to Coast in 2020: Minimum Wage Will Increase in Record-High 47 States, Cities, and Counties This January By Yannet Lathrop December | 2019 REPORT | DECEMBER 2019 Raises From Coast to Coast in 2020: Minimum Wage Will Increase in Record-High 47 States, Cities, and Counties This January On January 1, 2020 (December 31, 2019 in New York) the minimum wage will increase in 21 statesi and 26 cities and counties. In 17 of those jurisdictions, the minimum wage will reach or surpass $15 per hour. Later in 2020, four more states and 23 additional localities will also raise their minimum wages—15 of them to $15 or more. This is the greatest number of states and localities ever to raise their wage floors, both in January and for the year as a whole. More and more jurisdictions have been raising their minimum wages since the Fight for $15 movement began in November 2012. In total, 24 states and 48 cities and counties will raise their minimum wages sometime in 2020. (Illinois and Saint Paul, MN will increase their minimum wages twice in 2020 but are counted only once in the year’s grand total.) These increases will put much-needed money into the hands of the lowest-paid workers, many of whom struggle with high and ever-increasing costs of living. Below is a summary of what to expect in 2020: Minimum wage will increase in 21 states and 26 cities and counties on or around New Year’s Day, for a total of 47 jurisdictions. (See Table 2.) • Among the 21 states and 26 cities and counties raising their minimum wages on or around January 1, 2020 are Illinois and Saint Paul, MN, which will raise their wage floors twice—in January and July.
    [Show full text]
  • City of Belmont Minimum Wage
    City of Belmont Minimum Wage Frequently Asked Questions Q: What is in the Belmont Minimum Wage Ordinance? A: The Ordinance requires all Employers of Employees who perform at least two (2) hours of work per week within the geographical boundaries of Belmont to pay those employees the City Minimum Wage. The City Council adopted the Ordinance on November 14, 2017 to increase minimum wage to $15.00/hour by 2020. As of January 1, 2019, the City Minimum Wage is $13.50 per hour. Q: Which employers are subject to the City of Belmont Business License? A: Employers that have a place of business in Belmont or employers that must obtain a business license and pay the applicable business tax to conduct business within the City’s limits. Employers are required to pay employees no less than the City Minimum Wage for each hour worked within the geographic boundaries of the City. Q: How much is the City Minimum Wage rate? A: Effective dates and corresponding Minimum Wage rates are summarized in the table below: Q: How often will the Belmont Minimum Wage be adjusted? A: The City Minimum Wage will be adjusted to $12.50 per hour on July 1, 2018. Beginning January 1, 2019, the City Minimum Wage will increase to $13.50 per hour, and on January 1, 2020, it will increase to $15.00 per hour. Every January 1 thereafter, the City Minimum Wage will increase by an amount corresponding to the prior year’s Regional Consumer Price Index as reported by the U.S. Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics.
    [Show full text]
  • Ray Lynch Phd Final Copy
    AN EXPLORATION OF THE IMPACT OF THE IMAGES THE SPECIAL OLYMPICS PORTRAY OF PEOPLE WITH INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES ON PUBLIC ATTITUDES TOWARDS THIS MINORITY GROUP Raymond Lynch Dip, BSc (Hons), HDip, MA Faculty of Life and Health Sciences A thesis submitted for the award of Doctor of Philosophy March 2018 I confirm that the word count of this thesis is less than 100,000 words TABLE OF CONTENTS Title Page (i) Table of Contents (ii) Acknowledgements (ix) Abstract (x) List of Abbreviations (xi) CHAPTER 1: Introduction to Research Study: Overview of Societal Approaches to Disability, Social Inclusion and the Special Olympics 1.0 Introduction to Research Study: Overview of Societal Approaches to Disability, Social Inclusion and the Special Olympics 1.1 Introduction 1 1.2 Introductions to Societal Attitudes towards People with Intellectual Disabilities 3 1.2.1 Marginalisation and Exclusion of People with Intellectual Disabilities 4 1.2.2 Introduction to Political and Societal Developments Promoting Inclusion 5 1.2.3 Overview of the Special Olympics 7 1.2.4 The Role of Sport in Promoting Inclusion for people 8 with Disabilities 1.3 Society’s Four Responses to People with Disabilities 10 1.3.1 Response Number One: Survival of the Fittest 11 1.3.2 Response Number Two: Dependency Model/ Medical Model of Disability 13 1.3.3 Response Number Three: Rights Based Model/ Social Model of Disability 17 1.3.4 Response Number Four: Inter-Dependency 22 1.4 Current Irish Political landscape – Disability Policy and Legislation 23 1.5 Defining Social Inclusion
    [Show full text]