On May 28, 2021, the employer community got its first glimpse of a revised Cal/OSHA emergency, temporary standard (ETS) for COVID-19 that may become law by June 15, 2021. That day—June 15—is significant because it is the date the governor set as a goal for California to “fully open its economy.” In addition, the CDC’s

It is difficult to imagine that the evil of human trafficking, and all the pain and suffering it entails, can still be so pervasive this deep into the 21st Century. One would have expected that contemporary domestic and international law enforcement, to say nothing of the United Nations and all the monies it has at its disposal for such purposes, would serve as a resolute bulwark against this scourge of modern humanity. And yet it is a dominant player in the headlines as we learn daily of some new outrage perpetrated by those who would profit from human misery, sexual abuse, prostitution, illegal narcotics distribution, and other criminal enterprises.

There is a particularly scurrilous, often unrecognized activity within this umbrella of behavior that gets little attention and yet may be among the most pervasive—the grooming by US domiciliaries (whether or not citizens) of young, poor and often undereducated foreign nationals—from Asia, Central and South America, Eastern Europe and Africa­—to serve as household servants under the guise of promising adoption, education, employment and other illusory opportunities in the United States. Indeed, in conjunction with our public service law colleagues, we are representing such individuals in pro bono civil litigation against their captors in efforts to obtain both just compensation for the services rendered (routinely denied them), the restoration of their passports (typically taken from them), and the opportunity to be freed from what amounts to indentured servitude.

These situations exist among us, in our own neighborhoods, in the most unsuspected of places.  The law provides us with robust means of rooting them out and remedying the situation.

California Wage Order 15

We write today about the application of California Department of Industrial Relations Wage Order 15 (codified at 8 Cal. Code Regs. § 11150) to this “household occupations” circumstance. Subject to certain well-articulated (and largely inapplicable) exceptions, Wage Order 15 addresses the necessary minimum wages and employment times and conditions (e.g., meal and rest periods; facilities) to be afforded those working in the home environment. These include prospective deductions for meals and lodging provided to the worker.

The typical situation we address in this context concerns a young man or woman brought to the United States from their home country by a “patron” who has perhaps promised to adopt them and otherwise provide for their education, sustenance, housing, and employment in America.  Some victims might be requested to lie about their age and status (claiming to be an “orphan” even if one or both parents are alive) in order to ease any “adoption” process. Once in the United States, however, the relationship changes dramatically. The patron seizes the victim’s passport and enslaves the victim in the patron’s or another’s home to serve as a virtual around-the-clock servant, often without pay and perhaps even charging “rent” for the provision of room and board.

In cynical efforts to avoid the requirements of Wage Order 15, the patron may claim that the Order, by its terms, does not apply to legally adopted children (8 Cal. Code Regs. § 11150 (1)(C)) and/or that the victim is serving as a “personal attendant” to the patron’s elderly or infirm family member (8 Cal. Code Regs. § 11150 (1)(B)). The realities of the situation demonstrate, however, that neither avenue is availing.

This past month saw the inauguration of President Biden, who promptly took steps that will have an immediate impact on California employers. Plus, new COVID-related laws took effect, some expired (but may be re-enacted), and a federal appeals court eased the meal/rest break burden on the transportation industry. For a brief summary of these an

With the approval of Cal/OSHA’s new COVID-19 regulations, the proponents of action-taking won out over those who felt California’s existing laws, regulations, and enforcement arsenal were sufficient to meet the moment. It’s clear that California likes to lead—though it’s not the first state to enact specific COVID-19 standards (Virginia and Oregon got there first).

The California Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board has approved emergency, temporary COVID-19 regulations under California’s Occupational Safety & Health Act. California employers must now establish specific measures to curb the spread of COVID-19 in nearly every workplace in California.  The emergency regulations, which the Standards Board approved on Thursday night by a unanimous vote,

On July 3, San Francisco’s new “Back to Work” emergency ordinance took effect, requiring employers to rehire certain employees laid off as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic when the employer seeks to fill the same position formerly held by the laid-off worker, or a substantially similar position. The ordinance will expire on September 2,

Recently, in McPherson v. EF Intercultural Foundation, Inc., the California Court of Appeals addressed the legality of unlimited or uncapped vacation policies under California law. Three exempt employees sued the company for payment of unused vacation time at termination, despite being subject to an unlimited paid time off policy, because they argued the policy

To reduce the spread of COVID-19, many employers are requiring their employees to work remotely (either voluntarily or because several states, including California and New York, have imposed social distancing restrictions). The new work-from-home reality has implications for employers with workers employed in California and other states, as described in COVID-19: Working from home and

The California Healthy Workplaces, Healthy Families Act of 2014 (“the Act”) went into effect on January 1, 2015, but its key accrual and use provisions became effective on July 1. On July 13, 2015, Governor Jerry Brown signed Assembly Bill 304, amending California’s Sick Leave law to make immediate changes. Those amendments state:

  • Employers may