Dealerships, and quite frankly, other employers, from time to time, will put on a luncheon for the staff. The question is, “Does the employer have to pay their employees for their lunch period when the company sponsors the lunch?” Is there a difference between simply having lunch available for them, or having the luncheon as part of a staff meeting?
A California court has awarded more than $105 million dollars in restitution to Starbuck employees as a result of the company’s practice of permitting supervisors to share in customer tips! This case is important to all California employers that have similar practices between their supervisors and employees. Tips are for the non-exempt employees! Please evaluate your policies to ensure your organization is not engaging in any similar practices.
There appears to be a trend that some employers (Underwriters) are requiring genetic testing of employees/applicants to comply with certification requirements of family and medical leave laws, to genetically monitor the biological effects of toxic substances in the workplace. In addition, the other purpose is to conduct a DNA analysis for law enforcement purposes. WHAT DO YOU THINK??
We have received a number of inquiries regarding the legallity of installing surveillance equipment (both audio and visual). It is legal to do it, however, the dealership needs to have the employees made aware that they are being installed and get their signature that they are aware that the systems are being installed. In addition, all new hires need to be informed at the time of hire.
This is an issue that continues to haunt some employers! How does an employer “effectively” track employee time when they work in the field? What about breaks and lunches? How are those mandated breaks tracked to ensure the employer is in compliance? Let’s talk about it!
The employer does not have to hire, nor retain, an individual just because they have a medical prescription to take marijuana. The Feds have pre-empted this California law and stated that employers do not have to hire, nor retain, these individuals because they could pose a safety risk to themselves or others. A recent California case holding confirmed the federal position.
We have a dealership who was visited by the DLSE. They requested to see time records. They were specifically looking for when techs were taking their lunch periods. As a result, they are now directing the client to conduct a 3 year, self-audit, on all time records. Each violation will cost the dealership one hour of pay for each violation per individual.
This continues to be a question posed by our clients. The answer may not be as easy as you think. The Department of Labor Standards Enforcement has been on the prowl. Let me hear from you.
We have received calls that some applicants (upon being told that the company does a drug screen) have been threatening to sue for disability discrimination if they are rejected because they have a prescription to smoke marijuana. This scenario can also apply to an injured worker or if the employer reasonably believes that an employee might be under the influence of a controlled substance. Does the employer have to hire the applicant or retain the employee if they have a prescription?
I know managers have a tendency to alter time records records because one of their staff members forgets to punch in and out. Anytime a manager changes a time card, the employee must be aware of the correction and sign off that they understood that the record was adjusted. ALSO BE SURE NOT TO HAVE AN AUTOMATIC DEDUCT FOR LUNCH. THE REYNOLDS AND REYNOLDS SYSTEM HAS THIS FEATURE. DISABLE THE FEATURE AND WRITE UP THOSE EMPLOYEES WHO DO NOT PROPERLY PUNCH IN AND OUT FOR LUNCH.