Compliance Stuff

With Mother’s Day and Father’s Day approaching, employers may want to consider the benefits and protections afforded to employees who become pregnant or welcome a child to the family, as well as the employer’s legal responsibilities. Quick Hits Federal and state laws prohibit employment discrimination, harassment, and retaliation based on pregnancy. Employers may be required to provide leave and reasonable accommodations for employees experiencing pregnancy or childbirth, undergoing fertility treatments, or breastfeeding. Applying benefits and accommodations consistently can help employers reduce legal risk.   Legal Protections Several federal laws provide benefits and protect pregnant workers from discrimination, harassment, and retaliation in the workplace. In 1978, the Pregnancy Discrimination Act amended Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to prohibit employment discrimination based on pregnancy. Many states have similar laws providing benefits and legal protections for p...

California employers often focus on whether an employee’s complaint has legal merit. That instinct makes sense. If the complaint is wrong, exaggerated, or based on a misunderstanding of the law, it is easy to assume the risk is low. That assumption is where employers get into trouble. A recent California Court of Appeal decision makes the point. In  Contreras v. Green Thumb Produce, Inc. , the court confirmed that an employee can pursue a retaliation claim even when the underlying complaint is legally incorrect, so long as the employee reasonably believed a violation of law occurred. That is the disconnect employers often miss. The Shift Employers Need to Understand Under California law, an employee engages in protected activity when they complain about conduct they reasonably believe violates the law . That belief does not have to be correct. It only needs to be “reasonable.” An employee may complain about something that is not actually unlawful. They may misunderstand wage and h...

Bereavement leave feels like one of those areas where employers should be able to rely on instinct. An employee loses someone close to them, and the response seems obvious: be supportive, give them time, and move forward. But in California, that approach, while well-intentioned, is no longer enough. Since the enactment of Government Code section 12945.7, bereavement leave is not just a matter of compassion. It is a compliance issue, and employers, including Amazon, are already facing litigation for getting it wrong. What the Law Actually Requires California law requires employers with five or more employees to provide up to five days of bereavement leave upon the death of a qualifying family member. That includes a spouse, child, parent, sibling, grandparent, grandchild, domestic partner, or parent-in-law. The leave does not have to be paid. But—and this is where employers often miss the mark—employees must be permitted to use accrued paid leave during this time, including California H...

Many employers assume that initiating a workplace investigation after a complaint is inherently neutral and protective. A recent Tenth Circuit decision— Byrnes v. St. Catherine Hospital —is a reminder that the  way  an investigation is designed and conducted can itself support a retaliation claim if it appears biased or outcome-driven. The Underlying Facts A physician reported alleged sexual harassment by a colleague. The hospital concluded the complaint lacked merit. Months later, it conducted a one-day investigation into alleged misconduct by the physician, which included several notable flaws: The physician was never interviewed, which was contrary to the hospital’s investigation procedures No nurses were interviewed, even though “nurse concerns” were cited Investigators relied on selective accounts without testing contrary evidence Senior decision-makers accepted the investigation’s conclusions without independent review or giving the physician an opportunity to respond, u...