Author: Scott Horton

Scott has been practicing Labor & Employment law in New York for almost 20 years. He has represented over 400 employers and authored 100s of articles and presentations and wrote the book New York Management Law: The Practical Guide to Employment Law for Business Owners and Managers. Nothing on this blog can be considered legal advice. If you want legal advice, you need to retain an attorney.

COVID-19 Sick Leave

NYS DOL Proclaims New COVID-19 Sick Leave Mandates

On January 20, 2021, the New York State Department of Labor issued new “guidance” regarding COVID-19 sick leave. The two-page document signed by Commissioner of Labor Roberta Reardon purports to relate to the State’s March 2020 law regarding leave for employees subject to a quarantine or isolation order due to COVID-19. However, the DOL pronouncements seem to create new obligations not found in the law.

NYS COVID-19 Quarantine Leave Law

At the beginning of the coronavirus crisis in March 2020, both New York State and the federal government enacted employee leave laws specific to COVID-19. The federal law expired December 31, 2020 (though employers who continue to allow paid leave as the law provided remain eligible for tax credits). The New York law had no expiration date.

The New York COVID-19 leave law was comparatively limited, essentially only creating an employer-paid leave entitlement when employees were placed under a precautionary or mandatory order of quarantine or isolation due to COVID-19. The law is clear that the order must be from a government health authority, not a private medical provider.

The amount of leave required under the New York COVID-19 sick leave law depends on the employer’s size. The smallest private employers (less than 10 employees and net income under $1 million) do not have to provide paid leave. Mid-sized companies (up to 99 employees) must pay for 5 days of leave due to COVID-19 quarantine or isolation. Large private employers (100+ employees) and all public (governmental) employers must provide up to 14 days of paid leave in this situation.

The law also modified the NYS disability and paid family leave programs to supplement the portion of such leaves that employers did not have to pay for directly.

Click here for more on the New York State COVID-19 sick leave law.

Earlier DOL Guidance

In late March 2020, the NYS DOL issued guidance on the new leave law through a State website. This guidance addressed questions such as how to calculate the rate of pay. It also provided new forms for employees to request paid family leave or liability benefits due to a COVID-19 quarantine.

Click here for more on the original New York State COVID-19 sick leave guidance.

New COVID-19 Sick Leave Guidance

The January 20, 2021 guidance from the NYS Commissioner of Labor is initially notable for its format. Rather than a proposed regulatory document or even website guidance as used back in March, these new COVID-19 sick leave parameters appear in a plain .pdf file bearing a DOL logo heading and ending with Commissioner Reardon’s signature and a New York, New York dateline. Overall, this more closely resembles the approach used by the New York Department of Health to put out temporary standards for COVID-19 safety under Governor Cuomo’s numerous executive orders during the pandemic. However, no executive order has granted the DOL this authority.

The document begins by expressly referencing the March 18, 2020 “legislation authorizing sick leave for employees subject to a mandatory or precautionary order of quarantine or isolation due to COVID-19.” That legislation grants the Commissioner of Labor “authority to adopt regulations, including emergency regulations, and issue guidance to effectuate any of the” law’s provisions. But, again, this guidance is not in the form of regulations. Even emergency regulations would require more formalities. The law continues that “Employers shall comply with regulations promulgated by the commissioner of labor for this purpose which may include, but is not limited to, standards for the use, payment, and employee eligibility of sick leave pursuant to this act.”

Does the same force apply to a generic “guidance” document? That’s a fair question that could reasonably be answered, “no,” especially since the guidance seems to deviate meaningfully from the terms of the law itself.

Valid or not, the new guidance notes that “All prior guidance remains in effect”. It then includes four numbered paragraphs that seem to address issues that likely have been asked of the DOL about the law.

Return to Work

The DOL confirms that following quarantine or isolation, employees don’t have to be tested for COVID-19 before returning to work. (There is an exception for nursing home staff.) This conclusion seems consistent with the law.

But the guidance goes further to indicate that if an employee does subsequently receive a positive test result, they may not return to work. In that scenario, the employee must continue to isolate. Moreover, the DOL suggests that such an employee will automatically be deemed to be subject to a mandatory order of isolation from the NYS Department of Health and entitled to leave under the NYS COVID-19 sick leave law. This idea of an automatic isolation order appears contrary to the law, which plainly requires the employee to obtain an order from a health department to qualify for leave. The guidance says that, in this situation, the employee only needs to submit documentation from a medical provider or testing facility confirming the positive test result–again, inconsistent with the law.

New Paid Leave Scenario

The DOL also appears to have created an entirely new COVID-19 paid leave requirement not codified in the March 18, 2020 legislation. The guidance document indicates that if an employer requires an employee who is not subject to a quarantine or isolation order to stay home due to exposure or potential exposure to COVID-19, then the employer must pay the employee for all time missed until allowing the employee to return to work or until the employee becomes subject to a quarantine or isolation order. Notably, the DOL doesn’t establish any further exceptions to this new obligation. For example, it doesn’t relieve the employer of the obligation to pay even where an employee recklessly exposed himself to COVID-19.

There is no reasonable way to read this paid leave obligation into the March COVID-19 sick leave law. Nonetheless, employers must either adhere to the DOL’s position or risk having to contest it legally.

Three Strikes and You’re Out

When the New York COVID-19 sick leave law took effect in March 2020, no one anticipated the disease to remain prevalent for as long as it has. There was a general belief that anyone could only become infected once and that a 14-day quarantine or isolation period would eliminate any transmission risk. The way things have worked out, it has unexpectedly become clear that some people may run into multiple quarantines or isolations due to COVID-19. So, how much paid leave do they get?

According to the DOL, employees can qualify for COVID-19 sick leave up to 3 times. And the second and third times only count if based on a positive COVID-19 test.

Right, wrong, or indifferent, the law itself doesn’t say anything about three leave periods or limit any scenario to a positive test. Does the Commissioner of Labor have this much authority to re-write the law? Probably not, but again, who wants to take that risk?

Between a Rock and Hard Place

New York employers are already facing tremendous difficulty applying the array of leave requirements that potentially apply to employees dealing with COVID-19 issues. On the one hand, further guidance from the DOL arguably provides answers to questions companies are facing. On the other hand, it’s highly questionable whether the DOL has the authority to make these pronouncements. Both following and ignoring this latest guidance could create legal problems for employers. Not all of these “interpretations” are in the employees’ favor. So, even doing the right thing according to the DOL could upset an employee who might have a reasonable claim that they were denied rights under the NYS COVID-19 sick leave law.

Perhaps the DOL will clarify its authority, or the State will otherwise confirm the validity of this guidance. For now, however, employers should consult experienced New York employment counsel if confronted by any of the issues addressed by this DOL document.

 

For more legal updates of interest to New York employers, sign up for the Horton Law email newsletter and follow us on LinkedIn.

 

2020 Election Results for NY Employers Cover Slide

What the 2020 Election Results Mean for New York Employers (Webinar Recap)

On January 26, 2021, I presented a complimentary webinar called “What the 2020 Election Results Mean for New York Employers”. For those who couldn’t attend the live webinar, I’m happy to make it available for you to watch at your convenience.

In the webinar, I discuss:

  • Still Coping with COVID
  • Biden Administration Priorities
  • Anticipated New York Legislation
  • Unemployment
  • Union Activity

Without making concrete predictions, we can anticipate what the general tone of new administrative and legislative priorities will look like. Under Democratic-led executive and legislative branches, both the New York State and federal governments are likely to expand worker protections, and hence employer obligations, in 2021.

The groundwork is already in place for further developments related to the coronavirus pandemic. But the initiatives won’t end there. We expect the long-term impact on the workplace of the 2020 elections to be significant.

Don’t have time to watch the whole webinar right now? Click here to download the slides from the webinar.

Why You Should Watch “What the 2020 Election Results Mean for New York Employers”

New York employers have already been facing ever-increasing legal obligations regarding the workforce. This trend will continue in 2021 and may go much further than before. Beyond Albany, the federal government is now also poised to shift rights to employees. This will further establish the critical function of maintaining human resources compliance for all New York employers.

Among the administrative and legislative priorities in Washington will be renewed support for the labor movement. The 2020 election results will inevitably revitalize union organizing efforts as well as empower unions in collective bargaining. Any private-sector employers with unions or at any risk of unionization should be aware of this shift and prepare now to best position the company in its labor relations.

Other areas of focus will include leave laws, minimum wage, and worker health and safety. Staying on top of these changes will be a huge task for employers in 2021. Watch this webinar to prepare yourself for what’s to come.

Don’t Miss Our Future Webinars!

Click here to sign up for the Horton Law email newsletter to be among the first to know when registration is open for upcoming programs!

And follow us on LinkedIn for even more frequent updates on important employment law issues.

NYC Criminal Conviction During Employment

NYC Adds Protections for Employees with Criminal Arrests or Convictions During Employment

New York City joined the ranks of municipalities with a “ban-the-box” law in 2015. The original law prohibited employers with 4 or more employees from asking about an applicant’s pending arrest or criminal conviction record until after making a conditional job offer. Recent amendments to the New York City Fair Chance Act will add new protections for employees with arrests or convictions during employment.

The New York City Council passed the local law on December 10, 2020. Mayor Bill DeBlasio did not sign or veto the law in the time allowed. As a result, the amendments became law on January 10, 2021. The changes will take effect on July 28, 2021.

NYC’s Ban-the-Box Law

In addition to New York laws favoring the re-employment of individuals with criminal records, covered New York City employers must follow the city’s Fair Chance Act when hiring new workers.

Like other ban-the-box ordinances, the 2015 NYC law forced employers to remove questions about criminal histories from job applications. It further precluded employers from inquiring about an applicant’s criminal conviction record until after a conditional offer of employment.

The law separately prohibited employers from searching public databases for information about an applicant’s criminal record (e.g., “background check”) before a conditional offer of employment.

For more on similar laws in other New York cities, read my earlier post Checking in on New York Ban-the-Box Laws.

Criminal Convictions During Employment

The NYC Fair Chance Act will no longer only affect hiring decisions. It will also protect employees convicted during employment.

As with pre-employment convictions, an employer must evaluate the various legally-established factors and determine whether one of the following applies before taking adverse action:

  • there is a direct relationship between the criminal conviction and the employment held by the person; or
  • the continuation of the employment would involve an unreasonable risk to property or to the safety or welfare of specific individuals or the general public.

Pending Arrests and Criminal Accusations

The amendments also add new protections for employees with pending arrests or accusations of criminal wrongdoing. Employers similarly must consider the “fair chance factors” to decide whether adverse action may be taken either because there is a direct relationship between the alleged wrongdoing and the job or employment would involve an unreasonable risk to property or people’s safety.

Fair Chance Factors for Convictions and Arrests During Employment

When considering discipline for existing employees based on convictions or arrests during employment, employers must consider all of these factors:

  • the policy of New York City to overcome stigma toward and unnecessary exclusion of persons with criminal justice involvement in the areas of licensure and employment;
  • the specific duties and responsibilities necessarily related to the employment held by the person;
  • the bearing, if any, of the criminal offense or offenses for which the applicant or employee was convicted, or that are alleged in the case of pending arrests or criminal accusations, on the applicant or employee’s fitness or ability to perform one or more such duties or responsibilities;
  • whether the person was 25 years of age or younger at the time of occurrence of the criminal offense or offenses for which the person was convicted, or that are alleged in the case of pending arrests or criminal accusations;
  • the seriousness of such offense or offenses;
  • the legitimate interest of the public agency or private employer in protecting property, and the safety and welfare of specific individuals or the general public; and
  • any additional information produced by the applicant or employee, or produced on their behalf, in regards to their rehabilitation or good conduct, including history of positive performance and conduct on the job or in the community, or any other evidence of good conduct.

These factors are similar, but not identical, to the factors that apply in making hiring decisions based on a criminal conviction record.

Decisionmaking Process

Before taking any adverse employment action against a current employee based on a criminal conviction or pending arrest, an employer must:

  1. Request information from the employee regarding the fair chance factors.
  2. Consider the impact of the factors on the direct relationship and unreasonable risk analysis.
  3. Give the employee a written copy of such analysis with supporting documents and the employer’s reasons for taking the employment action.
  4. Allow the employee a reasonable time to respond before taking adverse action.

Specific Employer Rights

Temporary Suspensions

Employers may place employees on unpaid leave “for a reasonable time” while completing the process the law requires before taking adverse employment actions.

Intentional Misrepresentations

The law also permits employers to discipline applicants and employees from making intentional misrepresentations about their arrest or conviction history. This carveout doesn’t apply if the misinformation was provided in response to an inquiry prohibited by the law. And, in the case of apparent misrepresentation, the employer must give the individual a copy of the documents demonstrating an intentional misrepresentation and allow them reasonable time to respond.

Exceptions

The New York Fair Chance Act will now apply to all employers regarding employees in NYC with only some exceptions for police, law enforcement agencies, and public employees subject to certain other disciplinary procedures.

The law also does not require employment when another law prohibits it based on the nature of the conviction and/or job.

Preparing to Comply

Employers have until July 28, 2021, to become familiar with these new employee protections and plan accordingly. Employees who engage in crimes before then will remain subject to discipline without these protections. However, once the law takes effect, employers will need to follow the mandatory evaluation process before acting based on employee criminal activity. Though many criminal acts may still warrant dismissal or other discipline, employers will need to request information from employees and document their reasons for taking any resulting action. This process will be a significant change in many employers’ disciplinary practices.

 

New York City provides more information about the Fair Chance Act here.

For more updates on escalating restrictions on New York employers, follow Horton Law on LinkedIn.