As we enter the spring of 2019, employers should review their employee handbook and personnel policies to ensure that they are in compliance with several new laws and amendments which have recently (or will soon) take effect in New York and New York City.

On April 1, 2019, New York State passed an amendment to Election Law § 3-110 eliminating the part of the law that limited time off to employees who did not have sufficient time to vote outside of working hours, and increasing the amount of time off employers must provide employees to vote. Effective immediately, employers must provide all New York employees who are registered voters with up to three hours’ paid time off at the beginning or end of working hours to vote in any election.  Any registered voter seeking time off to vote must notify his or her employer at least two working days before the election.  New York employers must also post notice of this provision in their workplace at least ten work days before any election through the end of voting.

New York City employers will also want to ensure compliance with Local Law 185 and Local Law 186, which went into effect on March 18, 2019, and requires that employers provide employees with lactation accommodations, including a lactation room where employees can pump/express breast milk, and reasonable time to do so.  Employers are required to have a written lactation policy that informs employees about the existence of a lactation room, the process for making lactation-related accommodation requests, and that meets certain requirements under the law.  The New York City Commission on Human Rights recently issued model lactation policies and a model lactation accommodation request form to be used by employees.


Continue Reading

Join Shipman & Goodwin labor and employment attorneys Peter Murphy and Greg Jones for this complimentary CLE webinar reviewing effective legal strategies for dealing with difficult employees and the importance of a meaningful approach with regard to employee discipline. Presenters will discuss real life scenarios to aid legal counsel, human resource professionals and supervisory personnel

Join us for our annual spring seminar for public sector clients and friends, when we will address issues facing school districts, municipalities and other government agencies. The program begins with a plenary session covering a timely topic, followed by a choice of two breakout sessions allowing for issue discussion in a small setting.

When:

This post is about three simple rules that all employers should follow.  While there are always new topics in the world of employment law that are worth writing about, such as recent Department of Labor regulatory proposals on exempt employees or FMLA opinion letters, the following rules can apply to just about any employment situation. 

Don’t wait until it’s too late. There are steps you can take now to protect you and your business from costly litigation. This program will provide training and education on sexual harassment awareness and prevention for all supervisory personnel as required by Connecticut law.

Registration fee is $50 per person, and each attendee will be

Medical marijuana is once more in the news after a man was denied a position as a firefighter in Bridgeport allegedly due to his status as a medical marijuana user. The plaintiff in Bulerin v. Bridgeport, Superior Court, Judicial District of Bridgeport, Docket No. FBT-CV-19-6083042-S, alleges that the City violated Connecticut’s Palliative use of

On March 6, 2019, Shipman & Goodwin attorney Dan Schwartz presented to the next group of startups chosen to participate in the Accelerator for Biosciences in Connecticut, or ABCT.  ABCT is a Branford-based program spearheaded by Design Technologies LLC, which supports Connecticut’s aim of being a bioscience hub.

It’s an exciting time for new businesses

When Chastity Jones, a black woman from Alabama, lost a job offer because she refused to cut her natural locs, she turned to the federal courts. The company told Ms. Jones that her natural hairstyle violated the company’s grooming policy because locs “tend to get messy.” In response, Jones sought the assistance of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the “EEOC”) which brought a Title VII claim against the company
Continue Reading

Last year, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in Janus v. AFSCME, resulting in numerous implications for public sector employers (you can read our guidance on the topic here). Now, several months later, we are taking a fresh look at how Janus continues to impact public employers and their relationships with