FAQs about Holiday Pay in California

With the 4th of July falling this year on a Saturday, we thought this would be a good time to post some information about state and federal holidays, holiday pay and paid time off.

FAQs about Holiday Pay in California

State of California employment law does not require that an employer provide its employees with paid holidays, that it close its business on any holiday, or that employees be given the day off for any particular holiday. If an employer closes its business on holidays and gives its employees time off from work with pay, such a circumstance is treated as a company benefit to the employee.

Additionally, there is nothing in the law that mandates an employer pay an employee a special premium for work performed on a holiday, Saturday, or Sunday, other than the overtime premium required for work performed in excess of eight hours in a workday or 40 hours in a workweek.1

What is the holiday falls on my normal work week Aren’t I entitled to extra pay, of at least time and a half, for working on a holiday?

There is nothing in state law that mandates an employer pay an employee a special premium for work performed on holidays. Unless your employer has a policy or practice of paying a premium rate for working on a holiday, or you are subject to a collective bargaining or employment agreement that contains such a term, your employer is only required to pay you your regular rate of pay for all the straight time hours worked on the holiday, and the overtime premium required for work in excess of eight hours in a workday or 40 hours in a workweek. Since you did not work over eight hours on the holiday, or more than 40 hours during the workweek, you were paid correctly.

My employer is open for business on every holiday, some of which I have to work. Is this against the law?

There is nothing in state law that mandates that an employer must close its business on any particular day, if at all. It is up to your employer to select which days, if any, it chooses to be open and closed for business.

Last week we were closed for business on Monday to celebrate Memorial Day. Consequently, I worked Tuesday through Saturday that week, eight hours each day. When I got my paycheck this week I was paid for 48 hours last week at my straight time rate. Shouldn’t eight of those hours be paid at time and a-half, the overtime rate, since I was paid for more than 40 hours in the workweek?

No, you were paid correctly. In this situation, even though you did not work on the holiday your employer chose to pay you for it, which they have the absolute right and discretion to do. However, the determination of whether overtime pay is due is based upon hours worked, more than eight in a work day, and not upon pay received. Thus, since you did not work more than eight hours in any one workday, or more than 40 hours in the workweek, you are not entitled to any overtime pay for the workweek.

We get 11 holidays off each year without pay. Is my employer breaking the law because he’s not paying us for these holidays when he’s required to, even though we don’t work on any of them?

No, your employer is not breaking the law. There is nothing in state law that mandates that employees be paid for holidays that are not worked.

Cited:
1. http://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/faq_holidays.htm

2015 California Employment Laws Part 2: Wage and Hour

Part 2 of a 4-part series on California Wage and Hour Law changes.

Wage and Hour compliance is one of the most challenging areas of HR and one area where having an outsourced HR team of experts can save you a lot of money by lowering risk for workplace compliance. In 2015, many new laws have placed additional obligations on employers and have expanded liability.

Increased Liability for Employers That Contract for Labor:

AB 1897 imposes expanded liability for employers who contract labor.

When employers use contracted labor, such as a staffing agency, the employer can be held liable for wage and hour violations. In other words, if a labor contractor fails on any of these levels: fair pay, providing workers’ compensation, mandatory sick leave to its provided labor  the “client employer” can now be held legally responsible AND liable. For more information, review the Labor Contractor (AB 1897) — Fact Sheet.

Did you know that OmegaComp HR has a fully compliant staffing service? Contact us today for more information.

Rest and Recovery Periods

SB 1360 expands definitions of on-the-clock time for recovery from heat illness as paid breaks and counts towards hours worked. SB 1360 reiterates what is already law and was passed simply to clear up any employer confusion.

Waiting Time Penalties

AB 1723 authorizes for a penalty imposed upon an employer for the willful failure to timely pay wages of an employee who resigns or is discharged, also known as “waiting time”.

AB 2743, provides a waiting time penalty if unionized theatrical and concert venue employers violate any agreed upon time frame for payment of final wages contained in a collective bargaining agreement.

Protections for Complaints Under the Labor Code

AB 2751 clarifies that a $10,000 penalty fined to an employer who discriminates or retaliates against an employee who complains of Labor Code violations will be awarded to the employee or employees who “suffered the violation.”

Timeframe for Recovery of Wages: Liquidated Damages

AB 2074 authorizes an employee to bring a civil lawsuit against his/her employer for the unpaid balance of wages or compensation owed to that employee.

Also permits an employee to recover liquidated damages equal to the unpaid wages plus interest in a court action alleging payment of less than the state minimum wage any time within the statute of limitations.

Child Labor Law Violations: Increased Remedies

AB 2288, the Child Labor Protection Act of 2014, provides additional penalties for violations of California laws regarding employment of minors, including a penalty of $25,000 - $50,000 for “Class A” violations involving minors 12 years of age or younger.

In addition, the statute of limitations for claims that arise from violations of employment laws is extended, until the minor is 18 years of age.

Foreign Labor Contractors

SB 477 Employers are prohibited from using non-registered foreign labor contractors to supply workers in California. SB 477 also imposes disclosure requirements and other obligations on foreign labor contractors. There are penalties for noncompliance and joint liability for employers who use non-registered foreign labor contractors and potential for civil action.

Prevailing Wages

A number of bills signed this year relate to prevailing wages. Employers who provide services or construction work on public works projects for the government or public entities must pay the prevailing wage, which is usually significantly higher than the minimum wage.

The bills include:

§  AB 26; Public Works: defines the term “public works” for purposes of requirements regarding the payment of prevailing wages.

§  AB 1870; Public Works; requires that, except as specified, not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages, determined by the Director of Industrial Relations, be paid to workers employed on public works projects with regards to apprenticeship.

§  AB 1939; Public Works; allows a contractor to bring an action against “hiring parties” to recover any increased costs (including labor costs, penalties and legal fees) incurred because of a determination that the work performed on the project was a covered public work and is subject to prevailing wage laws

§  AB 2272; Public Works; defines “public works” to include construction, alteration, demolition, installation, or repair work done under contract and paid for in whole or in part out of public funds.

§  AB 2744; Public Works; imposes a civil penalty on contractors/subs who are determined to have knowingly violated provisions regulating the employment of apprentices on public works projects. The contractor/sub who is determined to have knowingly committed a s violation may additionally be denied the right to bid on or be awarded or perform work and provides for a process to collect the civil penalty.

§  SB 266; Another notable bill, SB 266, responds to concerns regarding delays in determining whether a project is a public works project for prevailing wage purposes

Background Checks

Several new laws relate to criminal background checks.

Criminal History Information in Public Contracts

AB 1650 requires contractors who bid on state contracts involving on-site construction-related services to verify that they will not ask applicants for the on-site construction-related jobs to disclose information concerning criminal history at the time of an initial employment application.

Services to Minors

AB 1852 requires a business that provide specified services to minors, must provide a written notice to the parent or guardian of the minor receiving those services. The written notice should address the business’s policies relating to employee criminal background checks.

http://omegacomp.com/2015-california-employment-laws-part-2-wage-hour/            

2015 California Employment Laws Part 3: Discrimination

Part 3 of a 4-part series on California Wage and Hour Law changes. Discrimination laws in California expand in 2015 to encompass protection against discrimination for drivers license holders who present licenses obtained regardless of being able to submit proof of their residency in the United States, documentation compliance in immigration workers, protection from harassment for unpaid volunteers and interns, and mandatory abusive conduct prevention training. In 2015, many new laws have placed additional obligations on employers and have expanded liability.
Discrimination against employees with undocumented drivers’ license – AB 1660
Existing law requires the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to issue a driver license to otherwise qualified California residents even if they are unable to submit proof that their presence in the United States is authorized under federal law. This bill amends the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”) to make it illegal for an employer to discriminate against individuals because they present a driver’s license obtained under these provisions.
Expansion of “unfair immigration-related practices” and clarification of discrimination – AB 2751
This bill expands the definition of an “unfair immigration-related practice” to include threatening to file or filing a false report or complaint with any state or federal agency. Current law extends the protection only to reports filed with the police. The bill also clarifies that an employer can’t discriminate or retaliate against an employee who updates his or her personal information “based on a lawful change of name, social security number, or federal employment authorization document.”
Discrimination and harassment protection for unpaid interns and volunteers – AB 1443
This bill extends the harassment and discrimination protections of FEHA to unpaid interns, volunteers, and apprenticeship trainees. In addition to being liable to these individuals for conduct by another employee or a supervisor, an employer may be liable for harassment by a nonemployee if the employer knew or should have known of the conduct and failed to take immediate and appropriate corrective action.
Abusive conduct prevention training – AB 2053
Employers with 50 or more employees are required to provide managers with two hours of harassment training (under AB 1825) and additional training on prevention of abusive conduct (under AB 2053) every two years—and within six months for newly hired or promoted managers. Employers subject to the mandatory sexual harassment prevention training requirement for supervisors must now include in the training prevention of “abusive conduct.” Abusive conduct is defined as conduct of an employer or employee in the workplace, with malice, that a reasonable person would find hostile, offensive, and unrelated to an employer’s legitimate business interests.
Read more: http://www.omegacomp.com/2015-california-employment-laws-part-3-discrimination/