Despite the Governor’s recent announcement for a tentative reopening of the state by June, California’s legislature has been busy passing COVID-19-related laws. At the end of March, the Governor signed Senate Bill 95, which resurrected and expanded supplemental paid sick leave. And more recently, the Governor signed Senate Bill 93, which implemented a statewide right of reemployment for certain industries.

Over the last four months, numerous localities (including the City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles County, Costa Mesa, Irvine, and others) across California have issued or considered “hazard” or “hero” pay ordinances that mandate premium pay for grocery and drug store employees and similar industries. While several lawsuits have been filed seeking to strike down these local ordinances, the state is considering two statutes that would support them.

First, Assembly Bill 889, would require the owner of a grocery store as soon as possible, but not later than 60 days or 180 days before a planned closure of a grocery establishment, to provide written notice of the intended closure to the city and county in which the grocery store is located, the local workforce development board, and the State Department of Social Services, along with other requirements for store closures. While at first blush this ordinance seemingly has little to do with the hero pay ordinances, as support for the bill, the proposed statute explicitly cites to planned grocery closures allegedly done in response to implemented hero pay ordinances.

In addition to the grocery industry, the state legislature is also considering Assembly Bill 650, which would mandate hazard pay retention bonuses for employees in the health care industry. The bonuses would be in addition to all other compensation paid to eligible health care workers. The bill would also make it a violation for a covered employer to discharge, lay off, or reduce a covered health care worker’s compensation or hours to prevent that worker from receiving hazard pay retention bonuses.

Jackson Lewis will continue to track local and state laws pertaining to employers and COVID-19. If you have questions about hazard pay or related issues, contact a Jackson Lewis attorney to discuss.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Joy M. Napier-Joyce Joy M. Napier-Joyce

Joy M. Napier-Joyce is a principal in the Baltimore, Maryland, office of Jackson Lewis P.C.

Joy counsels clients in a broad range of benefit matters, including general compliance and administration of qualified retirement plans under ERISA and the Internal Revenue Code. She also…

Joy M. Napier-Joyce is a principal in the Baltimore, Maryland, office of Jackson Lewis P.C.

Joy counsels clients in a broad range of benefit matters, including general compliance and administration of qualified retirement plans under ERISA and the Internal Revenue Code. She also assists clients with welfare plan issues involving cafeteria plans, health plans, flexible spending accounts, group insurance products, COBRA and HIPAA. Joy has a particular focus on assisting employers with the various compliance requirements associated with federal health care reform and has been a frequent speaker on the topic. Her practice also includes advice on non-qualified deferred compensation arrangements and other executive compensation matters, including issues related to compliance with Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code.

As part of her practice, Joy frequently assists clients with a variety of benefits issues arising in corporate mergers and acquisitions and restructurings of all forms. This includes analyzing benefits risks for buyers, handling plan corrections and terminations, strategizing and implementing benefits arrangements post-closing and advising on controlled group considerations.

Joy represents clients in dealings with the Internal Revenue Service and the Department of Labor, including EPCRS applications, private letter rulings, determination letter applications and plan audits. She negotiates with outside benefits providers, including prototype plan sponsors, third party administrators, insurers, actuaries and auditors. She also counsels both public and private clients on a wide array of tax and securities law issues in relation to equity-based arrangements.

Photo of Kymiya St. Pierre Kymiya St. Pierre

Kymiya St. Pierre is a principal in the Orange County, California, office of Jackson Lewis P.C. Her practice focuses on representing employers in workplace law matters, including preventive advice and counsel. She practices before the National Labor Relations Board, and state and federal…

Kymiya St. Pierre is a principal in the Orange County, California, office of Jackson Lewis P.C. Her practice focuses on representing employers in workplace law matters, including preventive advice and counsel. She practices before the National Labor Relations Board, and state and federal agencies and courts.

Kymiya has represented management in union organizing drives and elections. She has defended employers in unfair labor practice and compliance proceedings. Kymiya also provides advice and counsel regarding labor and employment law with respect to various issues, including providing workplace training and preventive advice and counsel. She has defended employers regarding different varieties of wrongful termination and discrimination claims.