COVID-19 |

Hospital Religous Discrimination Suit For Refusing To Exempt Worker Frim COVID Vaccination Warns Other Employers Denying Accommodation Risky

December 15, 2022

Children’s Healthcare of Atlanta (CHOA), a pediatric healthcare system in Georgia, faces a religious discrimination lawsuit filed by U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) that charges CHOA violated federal law by firing a maintenance assistant for requesting a religious exemption to its influenza vaccination policy.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits firing an employee because of his religion and requires that employers accommodate sincerely held religious beliefs unless the employer proves accommodation would impose an undue hardship. EEOC COVID guidance warns employers of the EEOC’s interpretation of the continued applicability of Title VII’s religous accommodation requirements to employers enforcement of COVID and other vaccine mandates. Other related guidance also warns employers to avoid retaliation against employees for expressing religous objections to vaccination policies or engaging in other protected actions in violation of Title VII.

The EEOC’s suit states the maintenance employee, in accordance with CHOA’s procedures, requested a religious exemption to CHOA’s flu vaccination requirements based on sincerely held religious beliefs. CHOA previously granted the employee a religious exemption in 2017 and 2018. In 2019, however, CHOA changed its policy and denied the employee’s request for a religious accommodation and fired him, despite the employee’s extremely limited interaction with the public or staff.

The EEOC asserts it would not have been an undue burden for CHOA to continue accommodating its employee as it had in 2017 and 2018. However it instead changed its stance on flu vaccination exemptions for this maintenance employee in 2019 and failed to consider any meaningful reasonable accommodations for his sincerely held religious beliefs.

Charging the refusal to grant accommodation arges this alleged conduct violates Title VII, the EEOC filed suit (Civil Action No. 1:22-CV-4953 MLB RDC) in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta Division, after first attempting to reach a pre-litigation settlement via its conciliation process. The EEOC lawsuit seeks back pay, front pay, compensatory damages and punitive damages for the employee, as well as injunctive relief to prevent future discrimination.

The suit against CHOA follows through on the EEOC’s commitment to investigate and enforce Title VII against employees failing to grant exemptions to otherwise applicable COVID or other vaccination requirements to employees with sincerely held religous beliefs against vaccination unless the employer proved undue hardship preventing the accommodation.

The lawsuit warns other employers with vaccination requirements to provide accommodations for employees with deeply held religous beliefs against the vaccine unless the employer can prove undue hardship sufficient to excuse the accommodation. The prosecution of the suit against a health care organization subject to the tightest vaccination and other COVID safety mandates under Centers for Disease Control, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and Occuoatiinal Safety & Health Administration regulations demonstrates the high burden the EEOC expects employers refusing accommodation to meet. In light of these EEOC CHOA and other enforcement actions, employers should proceed carefully before refusing accommodation. As COVID and other pandemic and epidemic outbreaks continue to threaten workers, patient, customer and community safety, organizations must tred carefully and be prepared to defend the adequacy of their actions regardless of whether choosing to allow or deny accommodation from applicable communicable disease protocols.

For Help With Comments, Investigations Or Other Needs

If your organization would like to learn more about the concerns discussed in this update or seeks assistance auditing, updating, administering or defending its human resources, compensation, benefits, corporate ethics and compliance practices, or other performance related concerns, contact management attorney and consultant Cynthia Marcotte Stamer.

An attorney Board Certified in Labor & Employment Law by Texas Board of Legal Specialization, Ms. Stamer is recognized for work helping organizations management people, operations and risk as a Fellow in the American College of Employee Benefit Counsel, a “Top Woman Lawyer,” “Top Rated Lawyer,” and “LEGAL LEADER™” in Labor and Employment Law and Health Care Law; a “Best Lawyers” in “Labor & Employment,” “Tax: ERISA & Employee Benefits,” “Health Care” and “Business and Commercial Law.”

For 35 years, Ms. Stamer’s work has focused on advising and assisting businesses and business leaders with these and other employment and other staffing, employee benefit, compensation, risk, performance and compliance management and other operational solutions and concerns. Her experience includes helping management both manage performance and manage legal risk and compliance. While helping businesses define and manage the conduct and performance of their employees, contractors and vendors, she also assists employers and others about compliance with federal and state equal employment opportunity, compensation, health and other employee benefit, workplace safety, leave, and other labor and employment laws, advises and defends businesses against labor and employment, employee benefit, compensation, fraud and other regulatory compliance and other related audits, investigations and litigation, charges, audits, claims and investigations by the IRS, Department of Labor, Department of Justice, SEC, Federal Trade Commission, HUD, HHS, DOD, Departments of Insurance, and other federal and state regulators. Ms. Stamer also speaks, coaches management and publishes extensively on these and other related matters. For additional information about Ms. Stamer and her experience or to access other publications by Ms. Stamer see here or contact Ms. Stamer directly.

Other Helpful Resources & Information

If you found this article of interest, you also may be interested in reviewing other Breaking News, articles and other resources available including:

If you or someone else you know would like to receive future updates about developments on these and other concerns, please be sure that we have your current contact information – including your preferred e-mail – by creating or updating your profile here. For important information concerning this communication click here. If you do not wish to receive these updates in the future, unsubscribe by updating your profile here.

NOTICE: Terms. These materials are for general informational and educational purposes only. They do not establish an attorney-client relationship, are not legal advice, a substitute for legal advice, an offer or commitment to provide legal advice or an admission. The information and statements in these materials may not address all relevant issues or apply to any situation or circumstances. The author reserves the right to qualify or retract any of these statements at any time. and does not necessarily address all relevant issues. Because the law evolves and in ways that subsequent developments could impact the currency and completeness of this discussion. The author disclaims and has no responsibility to provide any update or otherwise notify anyone any such change, limitation, or other condition that might affect the suitability of reliance upon these materials or information otherwise conveyed in connection with this program. Readers are urged to engage competent legal counsel for consultation and representation considering the specific facts and circumstances presented in their unique circumstance at any time. Readers may not rely upon, are solely responsible for, and assume the risk and all liabilities resulting from their use of this publication. Readers acknowledge and agree to the conditions of this Notice as a condition of their access of this publication. Circular 230 Compliance. The following disclaimer is included to ensure that we comply with U.S. Treasury Department Regulations. Any statements contained herein are not intended or written by the writer to be used, and nothing contained herein can be used by you or any other person, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties that may be imposed under federal tax law, or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related transaction or matter addressed herein. ©2022 Cynthia Marcotte Stamer. Nonexclusive right to republish granted to Solutions Law Press, Inc. All other rights reserved.

Comments Off on Hospital Religous Discrimination Suit For Refusing To Exempt Worker Frim COVID Vaccination Warns Other Employers Denying Accommodation Risky | Accommodation, Civil Rights, Corporate Compliance, corporate governance, COVID, COVID-19, Discrimination, Diversity, EEOC, employee, Employer, Employers, Employment Discrimination, Employment Termination, enforcement, HR, Human Resources, Internal Investigations, Joint Employer, OFCCP, Pandemic, Rehabilitation Act, Religious Organization, Religous Discrimination, Retaliation, Risk Management | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Texas Supreme Court Extends Emergency Order Providing COVID-19 Protections For Tenants

April 20, 2022

The Texas Supreme Court’s Fiftieth Emergency Order Regarding the COVID-19 State of Disaster (50th Order”) published today (April 20, 2022) reissues the judicial relief and procedures previously in effect under its Forty-Eighth Emergency Order (Misc. Dkt. No. 22-9015) in light of the U.S. Department of Treasury’s allocation of additional rental assistance funds to the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs (“TDHCA”) for the Texas Eviction Diversion Program.

Under the 50th Order, any Texas action for eviction to recover possession of residential property
under Chapter 24 of the Texas Property Code and Rule 510 of the Texas Rules of Civil
Procedure based, in whole or part, on the nonpayment of rent must comply with additional requirements and procedures beyond those typically required for residential convictions in the absence of the COVID-19 health care emergency.

Review the requirements of the 50th Order here.

Landlords and tenants contemplating or dealing with eviction or unpaid rent enforcement should review and follow these orders carefully.

More Information

For additional information about the requirements or concerns discussed in this article, republication or other related matters, please contact the author, employment lawyer Cynthia Marcotte Stamer via e-mail, via telephone at (214) 452 -8297 or on LinkedIn.

Solutions Law Press, Inc. invites you to receive future updates by registering here and participating and contributing to the discussions in our Solutions Law Press, Inc. LinkedIn SLP Health Care Risk Management & Operations Group, HR & Benefits Update Compliance Group, and/or Coalition for Responsible Health Care Policy. If you or someone else you know would like to receive future updates about developments on these and other concerns, please be sure that we have your current contact information including your preferred e-mail by creating your profile here.

About the Author

Well-known for her extensive work with health and life sciences, insurance, employee benefits, health and other insurance, financial services, technology, energy, manufacturing, retail, hospitality, government contractors, governmental and other highly regulated employers, her more than 30 years’ of experience encompasses domestic and international businesses of all types and sizes.

Ms. Stamer also is a widely published author, highly popular lecturer, and serial symposia chair, who publishes and speaks extensively on human resources, labor and employment, employee benefits, compensation, occupational safety and health, and other leadership, performance, regulatory and operational risk management, public policy and community service concerns for the American Bar Association, ALI-ABA, American Health Lawyers, Society of Human Resources Professionals, the Southwest Benefits Association, the Society of Employee Benefits Administrators, the American Law Institute, Lexis-Nexis, Atlantic Information Services, The Bureau of National Affairs (BNA), InsuranceThoughtLeaders.com, Benefits Magazine, Employee Benefit News, Texas CEO Magazine, HealthLeaders, the HCCA, ISSA, HIMSS, Modern Healthcare, Managed Healthcare, Institute of Internal Auditors, Society of CPAs, Business Insurance, Employee Benefits News, World At Work, Benefits Magazine, the Wall Street Journal, the Dallas Morning News, the Dallas Business Journal, the Houston Business Journal, and many other symposia and publications. She also has served as an Editorial Advisory Board Member for human resources, employee benefit and other management focused publications of BNA, HR.com, Employee Benefit News, InsuranceThoughtLeadership.com and many other prominent publications and speaks and conducts training for a broad range of professional organizations and for clients on the Advisory Boards of InsuranceThoughtLeadership.com, HR.com, Employee Benefit News, and many other publications. For additional information about Ms. Stamer, see CynthiaStamer.com, her LinkedIn Profile or e-mail her directly.

About Solutions Law Press, Inc.™

Solutions Law Press, Inc.™ provides human resources and employee benefit and other business risk management, legal compliance, management effectiveness and other coaching, tools and other resources, training and education on leadership, governance, human resources, employee benefits, data security and privacy, insurance, health care and other key compliance, risk management, internal controls and operational concerns. If you find this of interest, you also be interested reviewing some of our other Solutions Law Press, Inc.™ resources at SolutionsLawPress.com including the following:

NOTICE: These statements and materials are for general informational and purposes only. They do not establish an attorney-client relationship, are not legal advice, and do not serve as a substitute for legal advice. Readers are urged to engage competent legal counsel for consultation and representation in light of the specific facts and circumstances presented in their unique circumstance at any particular time. No comment or statement in this publication is to be construed as an admission. The author reserves the right to qualify or retract any of these statements at any time. Likewise, the content is not tailored to any particular situation and does not necessarily address all relevant issues. Because the law is rapidly evolving and rapidly evolving rules makes it highly likely that subsequent developments could impact the currency and completeness of this discussion. The presenter and the program sponsor disclaim, and have no responsibility to provide any update or otherwise notify any participant of any such change, limitation, or other condition that might affect the suitability of reliance upon these materials or information otherwise conveyed in connection with this program. Readers may not rely upon, are solely responsible for, and assume the risk and all liabilities resulting from their use of this publication.

Circular 230 Compliance. The following disclaimer is included to ensure that we comply with U.S. Treasury Department Regulations. Any statements contained herein are not intended or written by the writer to be used, and nothing contained herein can be used by you or any other person, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties that may be imposed under federal tax law, or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related transaction or matter addressed herein.

©2022 Cynthia Marcotte Stamer. Non-exclusive right to republish granted to Solutions Law Press, Inc.™ For information about republication, please contact the author directly. All other rights reserved.

Comments Off on Texas Supreme Court Extends Emergency Order Providing COVID-19 Protections For Tenants | Corporate Compliance, COVID, COVID-19, Landlord-Tenent, Pandemic, Real Estate | Tagged: COVID-19, Landlord-Tenant | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

South Sudan F-1 Visa Status Extended

March 4, 2022

The U.S Department of Homeland Security U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services is extending its designation of South Sudan for Temporary Protected Status and associated Employment Authorization:
for South Sudanese F–1 Nonimmigrant Students experiencing severe economic hardship as a direct result of the current South Sudan humanitarian crisis.

More Information

About the Author

Ms. Stamer works with businesses and their management, employee benefit plans, governments and other organizations deal with all aspects of human resources and workforce, internal controls and regulatory compliance, change management and other performance and operations management and compliance. Her day-to-day work encompasses both labor and employment issues, as well as independent contractor, outsourcing, employee leasing, management services and other nontraditional service relationships. She supports her clients both on a real-time, “on demand” basis and with longer term basis to deal with all aspects for workforce and human resources management, including, recruitment, hiring, firing, compensation and benefits, promotion, discipline, Form I-9 and other compliance, trade secret and confidentiality, noncompetition, privacy and data security, safety, daily performance and operations management, internal controls, emerging crises, strategic planning, process improvement and change management, investigations, defending litigation, audits, investigations or other enforcement challenges, government affairs and public policy.

Well-known for her extensive work with health and life sciences, insurance, financial services, technology, energy, manufacturing, retail, hospitality, governmental and other highly regulated employers, her nearly 30 years’ of experience encompasses domestic and international businesses of all types and sizes.

A Fellow in the American College of Employee Benefit Counsel, the American Bar Foundation and the Texas Bar Foundation, Ms. Stamer also shares her thought leadership, experience and advocacy on these and other concerns by her service as a management consultant, business coach and consultant and policy strategist as well through her leadership participation in professional and civic organizations such her involvement as the Vice Chair of the North Texas Healthcare Compliance Association; Executive Director of the Coalition on Responsible Health Policy and its PROJECT COPE: Coalition on Patient Empowerment; former Board President of the early childhood development intervention agency, The Richardson Development Center for Children; former Gulf Coast TEGE Council Exempt Organization Coordinator; a founding Board Member and past President of the Alliance for Healthcare Excellence; former board member and Vice President of the Managed Care Association; past Board Member and Board Compliance Committee Chair for the National Kidney Foundation of North Texas; a member and policy adviser to the National Physicians’ Council for Healthcare Policy; current Vice Chair of the ABA Tort & Insurance Practice Section Employee Benefits Committee; current Vice Chair of Policy for the Life Sciences Committee of the ABA International Section; Past Chair of the ABA Health Law Section Managed Care & Insurance Section; ABA Real Property Probate and Trust (RPTE) Section former Employee Benefits Group Chair, immediate past RPTE Representative to ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits Council Representative, and Defined Contribution Committee Co-Chair, past Welfare Benefit Committee Chair and current Employee Benefits Group Fiduciary Responsibility Committee Co-Chair, Substantive and Group Committee member, Membership Committee member and RPTE Representative to the ABA Health Law Coordinating Council; past Chair of the Dallas Bar Association Employee Benefits & Executive Compensation Committee; a former member of the Board of Directors, Treasurer, Member and Continuing Education Chair of the Southwest Benefits Association and others.

About Solutions Law Press, Inc.™

Comments Off on South Sudan F-1 Visa Status Extended | COVID, COVID-19, employee, Employer, Employers, h-2A Visa, I-9, Immigration, Internal Controls, Internal Investigations, Pandemic, Remote Work, Telecommuting, visas | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Biden Administration DHS Proposes New Rules On When Noncitizens Ineligible To Enter Or Remain In US Based On Likelihood To Become “Public Charge”

February 28, 2022

The U.S Department of Homeland Security is inviting public comment on proposed regulations (the “Proposed Rule”) defining the rules DHS will apply to decide when a noncitizen is inadmissible to the United States under section 212(a)(4) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) because the person is likely at any time to become a “public charge.” The proposed rules could affect workers or family members of workers who are noncitizens seeking to renew visas who have accessed certain public assistance while in the United States as well as noncitizens seeking new visas to enter the United States. The deadline for submitting comments is April 25, 2022.

Public Charge Rule Generally

Under Section 212(a)(4) of the INA, an applicant for a visa, admission, or adjustment of status generally is inadmissible if the applicant “is likely at any time to become a public charge” The public charge ground of inadmissibility, therefore, applies to individuals applying for a visa to come to the United States temporarily or permanently, for admission, or for adjustment of status to that of a lawful permanent resident.By statute, however, some categories of noncitizens such as refugees; asylees; certain T and U nonimmigrant visa applicants (human trafficking and certain crime victims, respectively); and certain self-petitioners under the Violence against Women Act are exempt from the public charge inadmissibility ground. Also the DHS Secretary possesses discretionary authority to waive public charge inadmissibility for a noncitizen that provides a suitable and proper bond or undertaking approved by the Secretary.INA Section 235 addresses the inspection of applicants for admission, including inadmissibility determinations of such applicants and INA Section 245 generally establishes eligibility criteria for adjustment of status to that of a lawful permanent resident.

Public Charge Proposed Rule Highlights

The Proposed Rule would consider a noncitizen likely at any time to become a public charge if he or she is likely at any time to become primarily dependent on the government for subsistence, as demonstrated by either the receipt of public cash assistance for income maintenance or long-term institutionalization at government expense. The Proposed Rule also would establish:

How DHS proposes to identify the types of public benefits that would be considered as part of the public charge inadmissibility determination;
General principles regarding consideration of current and past receipt of public benefits in public charge inadmissibility determinations
Factors that DHS would consider in prospectively determining, under the totality of the circumstances framework, whether an applicant for admission or adjustment of status before DHS is inadmissible under the public charge ground.
Changes to existing information collections submitted with applications for adjustment of status to that of a lawful permanent resident to include questions relevant to the statutory minimum factors.
A requirement that all written denial decisions issued by USCIS to applicants reflect consideration of each of the statutory minimum factors, as well as the Affidavit of Support Under Section 213A of the INA where required, consistent with the standards set forth in the Proposed Rule, and specifically articulate the reasons for the officer’s determination.

The proposed regulation, if adopted as proposed, would implement the following major changes:

Amend 8 CFR 212.18, Application for waivers of inadmissibility in connection with an application for adjustment of status by T nonimmigrant status holders. This section clarifies that T nonimmigrants seeking adjustment of status are not subject to the public charge ground of inadmissibility.
Add 8 CFR 212.20, Applicability of public charge inadmissibility. This section identifies the categories of noncitizens who are subject to the public charge ground of inadmissibility.
Add 8 CFR 212.21, Definitions. This section establishes key regulatory definitions: Likely at any time to become a public charge, public cash assistance for income maintenance, long-term institutionalization at government expense, receipt (of public benefits), and government.
• Add 8 CFR 212.22, to clarify that evaluating the likelihood at any time of becoming a public charge is a prospective determination based on the totality of the circumstances. This section provides details on how the statutory minimum factors, as well as an Affidavit of Support Under Section 213A of the INA, if required, and current or past receipt of public benefits would be considered when making a public charge inadmissibility determination. This section also states that the fact that an applicant has a disability, as defined by section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (Section 504), will not alone be a Start Printed Page 10572 sufficient basis to determine whether the noncitizen is likely at any time to become a public charge. This section also includes categories of noncitizens whose past or current receipt of public benefits will not be considered in a public charge inadmissibility determination.
Add 8 CFR 212.23, Exemptions and waivers for public charge ground of inadmissibility, which will provide a list of statutory and regulatory exemptions from and waivers of the public charge ground of inadmissibility.
Amends 8 CFR 245.23, Adjustment of aliens in T nonimmigrant classification, which will clarify T nonimmigrants seeking adjustment of status are not subject to the public charge ground of inadmissibility.

The Proposed Rule differs from the previous regulation DHS published on August 14, 2019 on the pubic charge rule, which is no longer in effect. Rather than continuing Trump Administration efforts to defend the prior regulation against various litigation challenges then pending before the United States Supreme Court, the Biden Administration announced its withdrawal of the prior regulation to reconsider its provisions, resulting in the termination of that litigation. The proposed regulation reflects the results of the Biden Administration’s new approach to the rule making, which many perceive as more generous to noncitizen applicants in various respects. The Preamble to the proposed regulation reflects the Biden Administration’s view that the 2019 Final Rule expanded DHS’s definition of “public charge,” in a manner ‘associated with widespread indirect effects on noncitizens were not even subject to the public charge ground of inadmissibility, such as U.S. citizen children in mixed-status households. According to the Preamble to the Proposed Rule, although the 2019 Final Rule imposed heavy paperwork burdens while the 2019 Final Rule was in place DHS only denied 3 of the 47,555 applications for adjustment of status to which the rule was applied and DHS subsequently reopened and approved those 3.

Potential Implications On Employers, Health Care Organizations & Others

The implications of the Proposed Rule vary depending on the circumstances. Because the Proposed Rule will de-emphasize prior reliance of a noncitizen on certain assistance, it may make it easier for noncitizen employees and others who received assistance during the COVID-19 pandemic or under other circumstances in the past to renew their visa to remain in the U.S. This could be helpful to businesses that concerned about the loss of noncitizen workers or service providers who otherwise might be disqualified by the prior need for or receipt of public assistance or unwilling to come or stay in the U.S. because of the disqualification of family members under the public assistance criteria.

The easing of the standard also may impact health care, community, religious, charitable or other organizations concerned that certain populations of noncitizens they service could be denied entry or forced to leave the United States.

Meanwhile, federal, state and local governments, community agencies and others also should assess the program eligibility and cost implications of the Proposed Rule and begin planning accordingly.

To review the Proposed Rule, a summary of the proposed regulation and history of the public charge rule and other details, see here. Persons interested in commenting on the proposed regulation should submit their comments electronically on or before April 25, 2022 following the instructions here.

More Information

About the Author

About Solutions Law Press, Inc.™

Comments Off on Biden Administration DHS Proposes New Rules On When Noncitizens Ineligible To Enter Or Remain In US Based On Likelihood To Become “Public Charge” | COVID, COVID-19, employee, Employer, Employers, h-2A Visa, I-9, Immigration, Internal Controls, Internal Investigations, Pandemic, Remote Work, Telecommuting, visas | Tagged: Corporate Compliance, COVID-19, Department of Homeland Security, Eligibility to Work, Employer, I-9, Immigration, Internal Controls, Managment, Workforce | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Confirm Continuing Form I-9 Compliance As Employees Return From COVID-19 Remote Work

February 24, 2022

U.S. employers of employees returning to the workplace after working remotely during the COVID-19 emergency should include verifying the physical presence and all other Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification (Form I-9) requirements for complying with Section 274A of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) are met by each employee returning to the workplace to minimize the risk of liability arising from failing to physically examine eligibility and identity documentation of employees hired to work remotely without physical examination of their original identity and eligibility documentation based on COVID-19 related limited Form I-9 flexibilities granted by the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”); upcoming or missed deadlines for reverification of eligibility to work documentation for employees whose eligibility documentation contains an expiration date or both. Employers should use care to ensure that COVID-19 related staffing or other operational disruptions result in any failures to timely reverify eligibility to work for employees with expiring eligibility documents; to examine in the physical presence of the employee the identity and eligibility documents of employees hired to work remotely during the COVID-19 health care emergency within three days of the date the employee resumes working at an employer’s worksite on a regular basis or April 30, 2022.

U.S. law requires that each employer, agricultural recruiter and referrers for a fee who recruits, refers for a fee, or hires an individual for employment in the U.S. (“employer”) verify the employee’s identity and employment authorization by properly completing and retaining the Form I-9 for that employee. In addition to requiring each employee to complete Section 1 of the Form I-9, employers also must require each employee to present original identity and eligibility to work documentation for examination by the employer in the physical presence of the employee before the employer completes and signs Section 2 of the Form I-9. In some instances, employers that previously completed a Form I-9 for an employee subsequently may be required to complete Section 3 (“reverify”) when the employee relief upon documentation with an expiration date to prove eligibility to work by presenting unexpired original eligibility documentation to the employer for examination in the physical presence of the employee before the employer can complete the certifications required by that Section of the Form I-9.

Whether conducting an original employment verification or reverifying the employment eligibility of an employee when eligibility documents expire, the Form I-9 rules normally require the employer to physically examine the document presented by the employee to prove identity and eligibility to work to ensure the documents the employee presented are originals of a document on the Lists of Acceptable Documents or is an acceptable receipt and that the presented document reasonably appears genuine and to relate to the presenting employee. When the documents meet these conditions, during this physical examination, the employer must enter the necessary information to complete the applicable of Section 2 or 3 of the Form I-9 and appropriately date and sign the Form I-9.

Employers hiring employees based on documents that will require reverification usually track the impending expirations and notify the impacted employees at least 90 days before the date is required that they will be required to present a List A or List C document (or acceptable receipt) showing continued employment authorization on the date that their employment authorization or documentation whichever is sooner, expires.

COVID-19 DHS Form I-9 Flexibility Guidance Limited To Qualifying COVID-19 Remote Employees; Set To Expire April 30

On March 20 2020, DHS issued Form I-9 flexibilities guidance in response to precautions implemented by employers and employees related to physical proximity associated with the COVID-19 health care emergency. Under the currently applicable extension of the flexibility guidance published in December, 2021, that flexibility is set to expire on April 30, 2020.

The March 20, 2020 Form I-9 flexibility guidance granted employers temporary flexibility to delay examination of original identity and employment authorization documents in the employee’s physical presence for employees working remotely as a COVID-19 precaution provided that the employer:

Inspected the Section 2 documents remotely over video link, fax or email, etc.;
Obtained, inspected, and retained copies of the documents, within three business days for purposes of completing Section 2;
Physically inspected the documents after normal operations resumed by requiring all employees on boarded using remote verification to report to the employer within three business days for in-person verification of Form I-9 identity and employment eligibility documentation;
Maintained and provided as required written documentation of their remote onboarding and telework policy for each employee and other necessary documentation and other evidence to meet the criteria to qualify for the flexibility; and
E-Verify participants who met the criteria and choose the remote inspection option continue to follow current guidance and create cases for their new hires within three business days from the date of hire.

For purposes of completing the Form I-9 documentation for employees covered by this flexibility, DHS directed employers taking advantage of this flexibility to delay physical inspection to enter “COVID-19” as the reason for the physical inspection delay in the Section 2 when originally completing the employee’s Form I-9 and when the employer physically inspected the documents when normal operations resumed, to add “documents physically examined” with the date of inspection to the Section 2 additional information on the Form I-9, or to section 3 as appropriate. DHS specified that employers could rely upon this COVID-19 related flexibility until the earlier of 60 days from the date of its notice or within 3 business days after the termination of the National Emergency.

On March 31, 2021, DHS updated its March 20, 2020 Form I-9 flexibilities guidance effective April 1, 2021, to limit an employer’s ability to delay inspection in the physical presence of the employee to remote workers. The updated guidance states employers are required to inspect the Form I-9 identity and employment eligibility documentation in person for any employees who physically report to work at a company location on any regular, consistent, or predictable basis. For employees working remotely hired on or after April 1, 2021, however, the March 31, 2021 update specifies the flexibility to delay inspection in the physical presence of the employee applies to employees working work exclusively in a remote setting due to COVID-19-related precautions until the earlier of the date the remote worker undertakes non-remote employment on a regular, consistent, or predictable basis, or the date DHS terminates Form I-9 flexibility guidance. DHS also stated that the flexibilities do not prevent employers from commencing, in their discretion, the in-person verification of identity and employment eligibility documentation for employees hired on or after March 20, 2020, and presented such documents for remote inspection in reliance on the flexibilities first announced in March 2020.

Since DHS subsequently extended the availability of the Form I-9 flexibility policy through April 30, 2022 because of ongoing precautions related to COVID-19, employers that meet the conditions of the guidance currently may continue to delay in person inspection of the Form I-9 eligibility and identification documents for a remote worker hired after March 31, 2021 until the earlier of the date the employee resumes physically reporting to work at a company location on any regular, consistent or predictable basis; April 30, 2022 or the date normal operations resume. Meanwhile, employers must monitor the DHS and ICE’s Workforce Enforcement announcements about when the extensions end and normal operations resume.

Verify & Strengthen Compliance To Avoid Potentially Costly Fines & Other Liability

Maintaining appropriate Form I-9 verification and documentation compliance is critical to reduce exposure to expensive civil fines and in the case of certain wilful violations, even potential criminal liability.

DHS base penalties for I-9 violations adjust for inflation annually. Under the inflation adjustments implemented in November, 2021. the I-9 violation penalty per Form I-9 are now:

For the first offense, $590-$4,722;
For the second offense, $4,722-$11,803; and
For the third or subsequent offense, $7,082-$23,607.

Appropriate documented compliance and remediation efforts by an employer are taken into account and can significantly mitigate if not eliminate civil and criminal liability assessments for Form I-9 and other immigration law violations Given the potential liabilities of noncompliance and the likely expiration of the COVID-19 flexibility guidance. all employers should include confirmation of continued I-9 compliance to their risk management activities.

As the COVID-19 health care emergency abates and businesses resume more normalized operations, employers that have resumed normal operations as well as employers with workers continuing to work remotely as part of their COVID-19 containment arrangements should ensure the employer has inspected the Form I-9 original identity and eligibility documentation of each employee physically reporting to work on any regular, consistent or predictable basis. In addition, as employees that previously worked remotely in response to the COVID-19 health care emergency resume onsite work, employers also should confirm that the Form I-9 documents not previously inspected in the presence of the employee in reliance on the I-9 flexibility guidance are required to present their original documentation for in person inspection by the employer within three days. Finally, because the COVID-19 health care emergency disrupted the normal operations and staffing of many employers, most employers also will want to audit the expiration dates, if any of any time limited eligibility documents presented by their employees to ensure that timely steps are taken to notify and secure updated eligibility documentation for employees whose employment relies upon those expiring documents.

Along with confirming that I-9 documentation for new hires and noncitizen employees relying upon expiring documentation during the COVID-19 health care emergency, employers also generally shoild reconfirm the adequacy of their overall I-9 policies, practices and documentation. Section 274A(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), codified in 8 U.S.C. § 1324a(b), requires employers to verify the identity and employment eligibility of all individuals hired in the United States after November 6, 1986. 8 C.F.R. Section 274a.2 designates the Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification (Form I-9), as the vehicle for documenting this verification. For current employees, employers are required to maintain for inspection original Form(s) I-9 on paper or as an on-screen version generated by an electronic system that can produce legible and readable paper copies. For former employees, the retention of Form(s) I-9 is required for a period of at least three years from the first day of employment or one year from the date employment ends, whichever is longer.

Employers receiving a NOI or other request for inspection typically will want to contact experienced legal counsel immediately upon receipt to discuss any concerns and review the materials to identify any potential areas of concern and opportunities for improvement or liability mitigation prior to the inspection.Employers that receive a Notice of Inspection (NOI) from DHS can expect to be asked to produce the requested Form(s) I-9 for inspection along with a copy of the employer’s payroll, a list of active and terminated employees, articles of incorporation, business licenses and other supporting documentation. Businesses relying on contractors, subcontractors or leased employees should be prepared to access and provide any documentation regarding those workers available when requested, particularly in light of ongoing worker reclassification and joint employer initiatives by various federal agencies. The time period to produce these documents in the NOI can be short. Typically the NOI offers three or more days before the scheduled inspection. However, legal counsel frequently may work with DHS to arrange for a short extension of the deadline to allow for collection and organization of the requested materials. However, even with such extensions, advance preparation and organization, including collection or negotiation of access to contract labor, contractor, payroll and other relevant records, can be critical.

More Information

About the Author

About Solutions Law Press, Inc.™

Comments Off on Confirm Continuing Form I-9 Compliance As Employees Return From COVID-19 Remote Work | COVID, COVID-19, employee, Employer, Employers, I-9, Internal Controls, Internal Investigations, Pandemic, Remote Work, Telecommuting | Tagged: Corporate Compliance, COVID-19, Department of Homeland Security, Eligibility to Work, Employer, I-9, Immigration, Internal Controls, Managment, Workforce | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

DOL Invites Employer Input On Youth Employee Mental Health Needs

February 17, 2022

Employers should put managing legal and operational demands for mental health accommodation for youth and other workers and their risk management agenda this year.

The Surgeon General’s recent release of an advisory report, “Protecting Young People’s Mental Health,” is one of a series of studies and guidance that the federal government has released in recent months on the impacts of the pandemic on mental health issues. The recently released Surgeon General report discusses impacts of the pandemic on mental health needs of young people. In connection with these findings, the United States Department of Labor is inviting employers and other interested persons to respond to a brief questionnaire from the National Youth Employment Coalition to help understand how workforce providers are grappling with this crisis. The DOL says this input will provide insight into the youth employment field’s current capacity to screen, connect, and serve youth with mental health needs. however, employers contemplating responding should note that the survey template requests that they respond it be identified by providing their name and other information. It is not clear whether the provision of this information may be used to target the employer for subsequent scrutiny.

The deadline for responding to the survey is March 11, 2022. To learn more, see here.

More Information

Want to know more? The author of this update, employment lawyer Cynthia Marcotte Stamer, conducted a briefing on these and other federal COVID-19 vaccination and other workforce requirements as a panelist on the “COVID-19 Vaccination Mandates & Incentives” virtual seminar the American Bar Association Joint Committee on Employee Benefits hosted on November 12, 2021. To purchase a recording of the program, see here. For information about obtaining Ms. Stamer’s slides, email here.

Solutions Law Press, Inc. also invites you to receive future updates by registering here and participating and contributing to the discussions in our Solutions Law Press, Inc. LinkedIn SLP Health Care Risk Management & Operations Group, HR & Benefits Update Compliance Group, and/or Coalition for Responsible Health Care Policy. If you or someone else you know would like to receive future updates about developments on these and other concerns, please be sure that we have your current contact information including your preferred e-mail by creating your profile here. For specific information about the these or other legal, management or public policy developments, please contact the author Cynthia Marcotte Stamer via e-mail or via telephone at (214) 452 -8297.

About the Author

For help developing, administering or defending your organization’s workforce, employee benefits, compensation or compliance practices, contact the author. Recognized by her peers as a Martindale-Hubble “AV-Preeminent” (Top 1%) and “Top Rated Lawyer” with special recognition LexisNexis® Martindale-Hubbell® as “LEGAL LEADER™ Texas Top Rated Lawyer” in Health Care Law and Labor and Employment Law; as among the “Best Lawyers In Dallas” for her work in the fields of “Labor & Employment,” “Tax: Erisa & Employee Benefits,” “Health Care” and “Business and Commercial Law” by D Magazine, Cynthia Marcotte Stamer is a practicing attorney board certified in labor and employment law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and management consultant, author, public policy advocate and lecturer widely known for management work, coaching, teachings, and publications.

Ms. Stamer works with businesses and their management, employee benefit plans, governments and other organizations deal with all aspects of human resources and workforce, internal controls and regulatory compliance, change management and other performance and operations management and compliance. Her day-to-day work encompasses both labor and employment issues, as well as independent contractor, outsourcing, employee leasing, management services and other nontraditional service relationships. She supports her clients both on a real-time, “on demand” basis and with longer term basis to deal with all aspects for workforce and human resources management, including, recruitment, hiring, firing, compensation and benefits, promotion, discipline, compliance, trade secret and confidentiality, noncompetition, privacy and data security, safety, daily performance and operations management, emerging crises, strategic planning, process improvement and change management, investigations, defending litigation, audits, investigations or other enforcement challenges, government affairs and public policy.

Well-known for her extensive work with health, insurance, financial services, technology, energy, manufacturing, retail, hospitality, governmental and other highly regulated employers, her nearly 30 years’ of experience encompasses domestic and international businesses of all types and sizes.

About Solutions Law Press, Inc.™

If you or someone else you know would like to receive future updates about developments on these and other concerns, please provide your current contact information and preferences including your preferred e-mail by creating or updating your profile here.

Comments Off on DOL Invites Employer Input On Youth Employee Mental Health Needs | ADA, Corporate Compliance, COVID-19, Disability, Disability Discrimination, Disability Plans, Discrimination, Drug & Alcohol, EEOC, Employee Benefits, Employer, Employers, Employment, Employment Discrimination, Employment Policies, group health plan, health benefit, Health Benefits, health Care, Health Plans, Mental Health, Mental Health Parity | Tagged: Discrimination, Mental Health, youth employment | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Latest Texas Supreme Court Emergency Order Extends & Modifies COVID Pandemic Rules For Texas Courts

January 20, 2022

The COVID-19 pandemic outbreak continues to disrupt ordinary litigation and administrative procedures including cases pending in Texas state, municipal and justice courts. On January 19, 2022, the Texas Supreme Court renewed and amended the COVID pandemic relief announced in its 45th Emergency Order. Its 47th Emergency Order:

Allows all Texas courts to use video and teleconferencing methods in civil and criminal cases through April 1, 2022;
Allows justice and municipal courts to suspend or modify trial-related and pretrial hearing deadlines through March 1, 2022;
Continues courts’ authority to modify certain procedures and deadlines in child-protection cases; and
Allows courts to continue to use reasonable efforts to hold proceedings remotely with certain exceptions or actions required.

Meanwhile, the order encourages justice and municipal courts to “move swiftly to return to regular pretrial and trial proceedings as soon as reasonably feasible before March 1, 2022.

The modified schedules, procedures, and dynamics resulting from this and other courts’ and administrative agencies can significantly disrupt the speed, progress and dynamics of investigations and litigation. Businesses and others involved in these enforcement activities should carefully explore the implications of these changes on the timing, prosecution or defense, cost and other aspects of their proceedings.

More Information

The author of this update, employment lawyer Cynthia Marcotte Stamer, conducted a briefing on these and other federal COVID-19 vaccination and other workforce requirements as a panelist on the “COVID-19 Vaccination Mandates & Incentives” virtual seminar the American Bar Association Joint Committee on Employee Benefits hosted on November 12, 2021. To purchase a recording of the program, see here. For information about obtaining Ms. Stamer’s slides, email here.

About the Author

For help developing, administering or defending your organization’s COVID-19 Mandatory Vaccine Policy or other workforce, employee benefits, compensation or compliance practices, contact the author. Recognized by her peers as a Martindale-Hubble “AV-Preeminent” (Top 1%) and “Top Rated Lawyer” with special recognition LexisNexis® Martindale-Hubbell® as “LEGAL LEADER™ Texas Top Rated Lawyer” in Health Care Law and Labor and Employment Law; as among the “Best Lawyers In Dallas” for her work in the fields of “Labor & Employment,” “Tax: ERISA & Employee Benefits,” “Health Care” and “Business and Commercial Law” by D Magazine, Cynthia Marcotte Stamer is a practicing attorney board certified in labor and employment law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and management consultant, author, public policy advocate and lecturer widely known for 30+ years working as an on demand, special project, consulting, general counsel or other basis with domestic and international business, charitable, community and government organizations of all types, sizes and industries and their leaders on labor and employment and other workforce compliance, performance management, internal controls and governance, compensation and benefits, regulatory compliance, investigations and audits, change management and restructuring, disaster preparedness and response and other operational, risk management and tactical concerns.

For more information about these concerns or Ms. Stamer’s work, experience, involvements, other publications, or programs, see www.cynthiastamer.com, on Facebook, on LinkedIn or Twitter or e-mail here.

About Solutions Law Press, Inc.™

Comments Off on Latest Texas Supreme Court Emergency Order Extends & Modifies COVID Pandemic Rules For Texas Courts | ACA, ADA, Affirmative Action, Corporate Compliance, COVID-19, Disability Discrimination, EEOC, Emergency, Employers, Employment Discrimination, Employment Policies, Government Contractors, Rehabilitation Act, Retaliation, Safety | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

SCOTUS To Hear Oral Arguments on OSHA COVID-19 Vaccination Rule Enforceability On January 7

December 22, 2021

The Supreme Court will hold a special session on January 7, 2022 to hear oral arguments whether the U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”) can enforce the COVID-19 Vaccination and Testing Standard rules that require employers with 100 or more employees to adopt and enforce COVID-19 vaccination and other related safety safeguards and the Healthcare Emergency Temporary Standard that imposes similar but more burdensome COVID-19 vaccination and other related safety and Recordkeeping requirements on healthcare organizations

The ETS and Healthcare ETS are key elements of a package of federal vaccine mandate and other added COVID-19 safety rules President Biden announced on September 9 he was directing federal agencies to impose on employers through a series of agency rules as part of his “Path Out Of The Pandemic.

The ETS and health care emergency temporary standard vaccination, testing and masking requirements add to existing OSHA guidance requiring employers to educate and train workers to use multiple safeguards to avoid and contain the spread of COVID-19 in their workplaces in accordance with these rules, OSHA’s general duty to provide a safe workplace, its anti-retaliation and anti-interference rules and other OSHA rules.

The OSHA COVID-19 mandates and companion rules that seek to require vaccination and other safeguards for federal workers, government contractors, facilities participating in Medicare and Medicaid and certain educational and childcare programs touched off a wave of court challenges across the country, which have resulted in conflicting and often unstable injunctive rulings.

The Supreme Court scheduled the special session on Wednesday, December 22. It is anticipated that the resulting decision will be quickly forthcoming help to clarify the enforceability of other federal agency Covid-19 vaccination mandates rules.

OSHA COVID-19 ETS

The ETS OSHA issued as a temporary emergency standard on November. 5, 2021 currently covers employers with 100 or more employees. However comments published with the ETS indicate OSHA is considering extending the ETS to smaller employers.

Under the ETS, covered employers must develop, implement and enforce a mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policy, unless they adopt a policy requiring employees to either get vaccinated or undergo regular COVID-19 testing and wear a face covering at work. The ETS requires covered employers to ensure their workforce is fully vaccinated or adopt a and enforce a policy that requires workers either prove they are fully vaccinated or workers who remain unvaccinated to wear masks and produce a negative test result on at least a weekly basis before coming to work. The ETS also imposes burdensome documentation and record keeping requirements.

The ETS is in addition to a separate mandate applicable to health care workers providing services to Medicare and Medicaid participating health care facilities. In June OSHA issued a different emergency temporary standard for certain healthcare workers that originally required nursing home and certain other care facilities to require and enforce vaccination of employees and other service providers. OSHA extended its health care emergency temporary standard to cover workers at most health care organizations following President Biden’s September 9 directives.

Along with OSHA’s issuance of the ETS and Healthcare ETS, the Safer Federal Worker Task Force, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and the Department of Education also published rules seeking to implement the other aspects of the Biden vaccination mandate strategy.

Both the ETS and the health care emergency standards provide exceptions for and require covered employers to provide accommodations for disabilities and seriously held religious beliefs required by federal equal employment opportunity laws administered by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) while making clear that the covered employer must be able to demonstrate with evidence that accommodations were required as well as implement appropriate alternative safeguards to maintain workplace safety. Where the accommodation prevents vaccination, this generally means adherence to testing, masking, social distancing and other standards to provide for safety.

Employers walk a tightrope negotiating these dual obligations. Discrepancies in the language used by OSHA to describe an employer’s responsibility to determine whether and when accommodation is required in the ETS compared to language in existing EEOC guidance calling for employer deference to religious and disability requests raises ambiguity regarding the degree of deference the OSHA rules allow an employer to allow to the accommodation claims made by employees versus the EEOC.

In addition, employers also must contend with the challenges of managing retaliation and other claims from workers associated with COVID-19 safety practices. The highly subjective, fact specific nature of these determinations under either interpretation make these determinations challenging for employers. The risk of negotiating these challenges is further complicated by the exposure to likely retaliation charges under the OSHA or Civil Rights Act anti-retaliation rules that employers must negotiate when dealing with expectations and waive of accommodation inquiries and requests from employees.

Retaliation and interference protections often protect employees against adverse employment action for good faith questions about or participating in investigations or other protected activity regarding safety, discrimination or accommodation even when the employee was not entitled to the accommodation or other protection asserted.

The significance of the retaliation risk is highlighted by the prioritization of retaliation investigation and enforcement recently announced by both the EEOC and OSHA. In March, OSHA launched a national emphasis program focusing enforcement efforts on companies that put the largest number of workers at serious risk of contracting the coronavirus. The program also prioritizes employers who retaliate against workers for complaints about unsafe or unhealthy conditions, or for exercising other rights protecteds by federal law.

The EEOC and other Department of Labor agencies also are prioritizing retaliation and interference investigation and enforcement. On November 17, 2021 the EEOC announced its involvement in the new initiative to end retaliation against workers who exercise their protected labor and employment law rights by collaborating among these civil law enforcement agencies to protect workers on issues of unlawful retaliatory conduct, educating the public and engaging with employers, business organizations, labor organizations and civil rights groups in the coming year.

In furtherance of this effort, the EEOC updated its COVID-19 technical assistance to include more information about employer retaliation under the Civil Rights laws the EEOC enforces in pandemic-related employment situations. Key points shared in this new technical guidance include:

Job applicants and current and former employees are protected from retaliation by employers for asserting their rights under any of the EEOC-enforced anti-discrimination laws.
Protected activity can take many forms, including filing a charge of discrimination; complaining to a supervisor about coworker harassment; or requesting accommodation of a disability or a religious belief, practice, or observance, regardless of whether the request is granted or denied.
Additionally, the ADA prohibits not only retaliation for protected EEO activity, but also “interference” with an individual’s exercise of ADA rights.

These and other OSHA safety mandates, alone or coupled with the disability, religious accommodation, age and other equal employment opportunity nondiscrimination, and anti interference

Employers Face Significant Continuing Risks Despite Preliminary Injunctions Against COVID Vaccine Rules

While litigation over the validity of its ETS and other aspects of the Biden plan to mandate vaccination of millions of Americans, OSHA has said it is continuing to collect comments because it views the comment period as separate from the litigation. OSHA extended the comment deadline stakeholders additional time to review the ETS and collect information and data necessary for comment.

While awaiting the outcome of the litigation over the OSHA vaccine mandates, employers should use care to conduct themselves to mitigate their exposure to violations of other remaining OSHA safety and recordkeeping rules, age, disability, religious and other discrimination claims and retaliation and interference claims.

The preliminary injunctions against the vaccine mandate rules does not impact the exposure of employers to retaliation and interference charges that could arise from their handling of employee questions or opposition to compliance with employer policies, assertion of rights, expressions of concern, and other activity. That means retaliation and interference claims present as big or bigger threat as the rules themselves and last beyond the reach and validity of the rules.

Facing peril from all sides, employers must tread carefully in developing and administering their workplace COVID-19 vaccination and other safety policies to manage the exposures created from the resulting Catch-22 legal and political environment. Employees of course must will monitor the litigation and other regulatory developments. At the same time, employers should use when dealing with worker and other inquiries, expressions of concern and other dealings with employees and applicants regarding COVID-19 safety, leave, accommodation and other concerns as well as to document carefully and preserve other evidence necessary to support performance and other business justified employment actions against potential retaliation or discrimination challenges.

Employers should use care to protect sensitive discussions about how to design and administer their policies, respond to employees and other sensitive matters by seeking the advice of qualified legal counsel and discussing these and related matters within within the scope of attorney-client privilege.

Employers should use care to carefully consider and document their decisions, including the basis and evidence supporting their justification in all workforce dealings keeping in mind that charges of retaliation or interference could arise from workforce actions not directly connected with an employee’s involvement in COVID-related concerns.

More Information

About the Author

About Solutions Law Press, Inc.™

Comments Off on SCOTUS To Hear Oral Arguments on OSHA COVID-19 Vaccination Rule Enforceability On January 7 | ACA, ADA, Affirmative Action, Corporate Compliance, COVID-19, Disability Discrimination, EEOC, Emergency, Employers, Employment Discrimination, Employment Policies, Government Contractors, Rehabilitation Act, Retaliation, Safety | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

COVID-19 Vaccination Rule Injunctions Leave Employers With Significant Liability Challenges Even As OSHA Extends Comment Period on OSHA COVID-19 Vaccine ETS

December 1, 2021

Employers face significant continuing risk from retaliation and other claims from workers associated with COVID-19 safety practices despite court-compelled delays in the Biden Administration’s efforts to implement its vaccination mandates and the U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”) announcement of its extension of the comment deadline for its now-enjoined COVID-19 Vaccination and Testing Standard to January 19, 2022.

ETS & Other Federal Vaccine Mandates

The ETS is one of several vaccine mandate and other added COVID-19 safety rules President Biden announced on September 9 he directed federal agencies to impose on employers through a series of agency rules as part of his “Path Out Of The Pandemic” plan that include Executive Orders ordering:

OSHA to issue emergency rules that would require all employers with more than 100 employees to get vaccinated or be tested at least weekly;
OSHA and other federal regulations to require vaccinations for all federal workers, contractors and subcontractors;
OSHA and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) rules to require COVID-⁠19 vaccinations for all health care workers at Medicare and Medicaid participating hospitals and other health care settings;
Using Department of Education and federal funding measures to support vaccination and masking in schools; and
Calling on large entertainment venues to require proof of vaccination or testing for entry.

OSHA COVID-19 ETS

The highly subjective, fact specific nature of these determinations under either interpretation make these determinations challenging for employers. The risk of negotiating these challenges is further complicated by the exposure to likely retaliation charges under the OSHA or Civil Rights Act anti-retaliation rules that employers must negotiate when dealing with expectations and waive of accommodation inquiries and requests from employees.

Job applicants and current and former employees are protected from retaliation by employers for asserting their rights under any of the EEOC-enforced anti-discrimination laws.
Protected activity can take many forms, including filing a charge of discrimination; complaining to a supervisor about coworker harassment; or requesting accommodation of a disability or a religious belief, practice, or observance, regardless of whether the request is granted or denied.
Additionally, the ADA prohibits not only retaliation for protected EEO activity, but also “interference” with an individual’s exercise of ADA rights.

These and other OSHA safety mandates, alone or coupled with the disability, religious accommodation, age and other equal employment opportunity nondiscrimination, and anti interference

Litigation Challenging ETS & Other Federal Vaccine Mandates

Along with OSHA’s issuance of the ETS, the Safer Federal Worker Task Force, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and the Department of Education also published rules seeking to implement the other aspects of the Biden vaccination mandate strategy.

The ETS and other rules also are facing court challenges. On November 12, 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit granted a motion to stay OSHA’s COVID-19 Vaccination and Testing Emergency Temporary Standard, published on November 5, 2021 (86 Fed. Reg. 61402) (“ETS”). The court ordered that OSHA “take no steps to implement or enforce” the ETS “until further court order.” The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit now has jurisdiction over ETS challenges and DOL has filed a motion to lift the stay. While OSHA remains confident in its authority to protect workers in emergencies, OSHA has suspended activities related to the implementation and enforcement of the ETS pending future developments in the litigation. Note that the comment period is separate from the litigation.

On Monday, November 29, 2021, for instance, a Federal District Court in Missouri v. Biden issued a preliminary injunction staying enforcement against the States of Missouri, Nebraska, Arkansas, Kansas, Iowa, Wyoming, Alaska, South Dakota, North Dakota, and New Hampshire of the vaccine and other COVID-19 safety requirements for federal contractors and subcontractors imposed by the Safer Federal Workforce Task Force COVID-19 Workplace Safety: Guidance for Federal Contractors and Subcontractors issued by website posting on September 24, 2021

Employers Face Significant Continuing Risks Despite Preliminary Injunctions Against COVID Vaccine Rules

More Information

About the Author

About Solutions Law Press, Inc.™

Comments Off on COVID-19 Vaccination Rule Injunctions Leave Employers With Significant Liability Challenges Even As OSHA Extends Comment Period on OSHA COVID-19 Vaccine ETS | ACA, ADA, Affirmative Action, Corporate Compliance, COVID-19, Disability Discrimination, EEOC, Emergency, Employers, Employment Discrimination, Employment Policies, Government Contractors, Rehabilitation Act, Retaliation, Safety | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Temporary Stay Of OSHA Vaccine ETS Fuels Continued Employer Risk & Uncertainty

November 22, 2021

The Occupational Safety & Health Administration (“OSHA”) has suspended implementation and enforcement of COVID-19 Vaccination and Testing Emergency Temporary Standard(“Rule”) in response to the November 12, 2021 5th Circuit Court of Appeals order staying implementation of the Rule – for now. While the action delays the deadline for covered employers to comply with the Rule, employers still remain exposed to other COVID-related discrimination, retaliation, safety and other claims.

One of a series of new federal rules adopted over the past few months that require businesses employing more than 100 employees, government contractors and subcontractors and health care providers participating in Medicare or Medicaid to implement and enforce COVID-19 vaccination and other safeguards, the Rule ordered covered employers to adopt and enforce requirements that employees to get vaccinated or undergo regular testing and wear masks unless the employee qualifies for a religious or disability exception. Similar but tighter vaccination mandates are required in a separate OSHA emergency temporary standards for health care workers, a new condition of participation requirement for covered health care organizations to participate in Medicare or Medicaid, and conditions of eligibility to enter into federal government contracts over $250,000.

Last week, the 5th Circuit ordered that OSHA “take no steps to implement or enforce” the ETS “until further court order.” The Rule also faces challenges in several other Circuit Courts of Appeals. Ultimately, the Supreme Court is expected to decide the fate of the Rule.

While OSHA remains confident in its authority to protect workers in emergencies, OSHA has suspended activities related to the implementation and enforcement of the ETS pending future developments in the litigation.

Pending final resolution of court challenges to the Rule, the 5th Circuit stay temporarily puts on hold the Rule OSHA published November 5, 2021, which generally requires employers with at least 100 employees to adopt and enforce COVID-19 vaccination or alternative testing and masking requirements for all employees in their workplaces by December 4, 2021.

Regardless of the ultimate outcome of challenges to the OSHA Rule, employees face significant risk negotiating vaccine and other COVID-19 safety policies from employee discrimination, retaliation and safety challenges and inquiries. The suspension adds more uncertainty and controversy to employers struggling to develop and administer Covid-19 vaccination and other safety policies around often conflicting federal and state rules in a highly charged political and litigious environment fraught with discrimination and retaliation claims risks fueled to new heights by new OSHA and EEOC retaliation guidance published last week.

Aside from OSHA’s announced confidence that the 5th Circuit’s temporary stay will be removed as litigation over the Rule progresses, the 5th Circuit order technically does not stop implementation of OSHA’s separate emergency temporary standard requiring vaccination for health care workers or new rules adding COVID-19 vaccination requirements as conditions of program participation for government contractors and Medicare participating health care providers.

Regardless of the outcome of the 5th Circuit ordered stay, the uncertainty created from differences among these federal and state rules and the 5th Circuit ordered stay provides tinder for retaliation claims against employers regardless of how the business chooses to respond to the stay.

Even if the mandates are enjoined are inapplicable to an organization, opposition to compliance, questions, expressions of concern, and other activity can support retaliation claims. That means retaliation and interference claims present as big or bigger threat as the rules themselves and last beyond the reach and validity of the rules.

Facing peril from all sides, employers must tread carefully in developing and administering their workplace COVID-19 vaccination and other safety policies to manage the exposures created from the resulting Catch-22 legal and political environment. Employees of course must will monitor the litigation and other regulatory developments. At the same time, employers should use when dealing with worker and other inquiries, expressions of concern and other dealings with employees and applicants regarding COVID-19 SAFETY, leave, accommodation and other concerns as well as to document carefully and preserve other evidence necessary to support performance and other business justified employment actions against potential retaliation or discrimination challenges.

More Information

About the Author

About Solutions Law Press, Inc.™

Comments Off on Temporary Stay Of OSHA Vaccine ETS Fuels Continued Employer Risk & Uncertainty | ADA, Affirmative Action, compliance, Corporate Compliance, COVID, COVID-19, Disaster, Disease Management, Diversity, EEOC, Employee Benefits, Employee Handbook, Employer, Employers, Employment, Employment Discrimination, Employment Policies, Employment Termination, Government Contractors, health Care, HR, Human Resources, Joint Employer, Labor Management Relations, Management, OFCCP, OSHA, Pandemic, vaccination mandate, vaccine mandate, Worker Classification, Workforce | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Most OSHA COVID-19 Vaccine & Other Mandates Take Effect 12/4 For 100+ Workforces As OSHA Considers Extending Mandates To Smaller Workplaces

November 4, 2021

December 4, 2022 is the deadline for employers 100 or more employees to comply with the new Occupational Safety and Health Administration COVID-19 Vaccination Emergency Temporary Standard Interim Final Rule (“ETS”) implementing the employer vaccine, masking and testing mandates President Biden announced his administration intended to impose in September. The ETS is scheduled for official publication in the Federal Register tomorrow. (November 5, 2021). The ETS establishes workplace vaccination, vaccination verification, face covering and testing requirements to address “the grave danger of COVID-19 in the workplace for employers of 100 or more employees. The request for comments included in the Preamble to the ETS indicates that OSHA also is considering extending the rules to apply to smaller employers. Businesses employing more than 100 employees must prepare to comply by December 4, 2022, except that the compliance deadline for certain testing requirements for nonvaccinated employees is January 4, 2021. As the request for comments indicates OSHA is considering extending the rule to businesses with fewer than 100 employees, businesses also should critically evaluate the impact of the rules on their operations and submit comments during the comment period.

Biden Administration COVID-19 Vaccination Strategy

The ETS implements part of a series of COVID-19 vaccination mandates President Biden announced in September that his administration planned to adopt to substantially increase the number Americans covered by vaccination requirements, including:

OSHA to issue emergency rules that would require all employers with more than 100 employees to get vaccinated or be tested at least weekly;
OSHA and other federal regulations to require vaccinations for all federal workers, contractors and subcontractors;
OSHA and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) rules to require COVID-⁠19 vaccinations for all health care workers at Medicare and Medicaid participating hospitals and other health care settings;
Using Department of Education and federal funding measures to support vaccination and masking in schools; and
Calling on large entertainment venues to require proof of vaccination or testing for entry.

Regarding the OSHA mandate, President Biden’s “Path out of the Pandemic COVID-19 Action Plan” states OSHA is developing an Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS) that will require all employers with 100 or more employees to ensure their workforce is fully vaccinated or require any workers who remain unvaccinated to produce a negative test result on at least a weekly basis before coming to work.

Along with OSHA’s issuance of the ETS, HHS, OFCCP, the Department of Education also are moving forward to implement the other aspects of the Biden vaccination mandate strategy.

These new mandates are in addition to continuing to encourage employers to use and train workers on using multiple safeguards to avoid And contain the spread of COVID-19 in their workplaces.

Noncompliance with the mandates could put covered employers at significant risk.

Among other things, of course, is the potential OSHA liability. OSHA already has made clear it’s willingness to sanction employers for violating CoVID emergency standards by nailing AMA Health Holdings LLC, for and Lakewood Resource and Referral Center Inc. (“CHEMED”) for failing to comply with COVID-19 safety protocols issued in June.

In June OSHA issued an emergency temporary standard to protect healthcare workers from contracting coronavirus. In March, OSHA launched a national emphasis program focusing enforcement efforts on companies that put the largest number of workers at serious risk of contracting the coronavirus. The program also prioritizes employers who retaliate against workers for complaints about unsafe or unhealthy conditions, or for exercising other rights protected by federal law.

OSHA cited the facility’s operator, AMA Health Holdings LLC, with two citations for failing to develop and implement effective measures to mitigate the spread of the virus and not recording each work-related illness.

The AMA Holdings OSHA action demonstrates OSHA’s commitment to investigate complaints of violations is its COVID emergency standards and fine employers that violate them.

The citations against AMA Health Holdings follow OSHA’s earlier citation of CHEMED for retaliating against employees for questioning the adequacy of COVID safety at the dental practice where they worked.

Government contractor and healthcare employers also could face program exclusions or penalties under other elements of the Biden Administration vaccine strategy.

Additionally, employers should keep in mind that improperly handled employee questions or statements of concern about the adequacy of workplace COVID -19 safeguards could create retaliation or whistleblower risks. The threat for retaliation liability extends well beyond employers actually covered by the impending mandates. Regardless of what the rules actually eventually provide, employees of covered and uncovered employers are likely to have questions about the adequacy of safeguards and their workplace rights. These questions could come from people believing their entitled to work without being vaccinated, employees a certain rate to takeoff time for vaccination or other reasons with or without pay, employees asking or asserting rights to paid time off for vaccination or other reasons or a host of other matters. Retaliation protections can arise even when the employee doesn’t qualify for the rights asserted as long as the employee can demonstrate that the request is based in a good faith belief that the right might exist. Consequently, employers should use care to investigate and respond carefully to these concerns.

More Information

The author of this update, employment lawyer Cynthia Marcotte Stamer, will discuss these and other federal COVID-19 vaccination and other workforce requirements as a panelist on the “COVID-19 Vaccination Mandates & Incentives” virtual seminar the American Bar Association Joint Committee on Employee Benefits will host on November 12, 2021 beginning at Noon Central Time.

Ms. Stamer also is finalizing an updated summary of the new ETS, which Solutions Law Press, Inc. has arranged to make available to interested readers. If you or someone you know would like a copy of this resource, email here .

About the Author

About Solutions Law Press, Inc.™

Comments Off on Most OSHA COVID-19 Vaccine & Other Mandates Take Effect 12/4 For 100+ Workforces As OSHA Considers Extending Mandates To Smaller Workplaces | Child Safety, Construction, Corporate Compliance, COVID, COVID-19, Employer, Employers, Employment Discrimination, Employment Policies, OSHA, Pandemic, Retaliation, Safety, vaccine mandate | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Justice Department & Wisconsin Officials Warn Falsifying COVID Vaccination Records Is Federal Crime

September 13, 2021

Federal and Wisconsin officials warned buying or selling fake COVID-19 vaccination records is federal crime and cautioned citizens to protect their records from fraudulent use in a joint press release on Friday.

The warning followed President Biden‘s announcement last week of plans to implement COVID-19 vaccination mandates for healthcare workers, federal government contractors, employers with more than 100 employees and all federal employees. See Biden’s Impending Employer Vaccine Mandates: What Is Known Now.

In the joint press release, attorneys from the US Department of Justice and Wisconsin officials warned the public that any act of creating, distributing, selling, or buying of fake COVID-19 vaccination record cards and any act of forging COVID-19 vaccination information is illegal and punishable under federal law.

The unauthorized use of an official government agency’s seal, such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), is a crime and may be punishable under federal law under Title 18 United States Code, Section 1017, and other applicable laws.

The press release also reminds Wisconsinites to not post vaccine cards on social media as the information could be stolen to commit fraud.

“If you have not been vaccinated, do not make your own cards or buy fake cards,” said Wisconsin Inspector General Anthony Baize. “If you were vaccinated and your card was not filled out correctly, do not fill in the card yourself. Instead, call your vaccine provider.”

“Public and private institutions, including employers, universities, schools, and businesses, need to be able to rely on the legitimacy of COVID-19 vaccine cards. Our office will use all available tools to prosecute individuals who knowingly falsify vaccine cards,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Richard Frohling.

“Legitimate COVID-19 vaccine cards—like the vaccines themselves—are crucial tools to prevent illness and death. People who are foolish or selfish (or both) enough to supply bogus vaccination cards, allowing others to circumvent COVID-19 curtailment efforts, will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law,” said Timothy M. O’Shea, Acting U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Wisconsin.

The press release also invites persons who know or suspect that any healthcare provider, pharmacy, private business, or Wisconsin resident is creating, distributing, selling, buying or forging COVID-19 vaccination cards in-person or online, to report such conduct to the Wisconsin Department of Health Services, Office of Inspector General (877-865-3432 or http://www.reportfraud.wisconsin.gov); U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General (1-800-HHS-TIPS or http://www.oig.hhs.gov); or the Internet Crime Complaint Center (www.ic3.gov).

More Information

About the Author

Recognized by her peers as a Martindale-Hubble “AV-Preeminent” (Top 1%) and “Top Rated Lawyer” with special recognition LexisNexis® Martindale-Hubbell® as “LEGAL LEADER™ Texas Top Rated Lawyer” in Health Care Law and Labor and Employment Law; as among the “Best Lawyers In Dallas” for her work in the fields of “Labor & Employment,” “Tax: ERISA & Employee Benefits,” “Health Care” and “Business and Commercial Law” by D Magazine, Cynthia Marcotte Stamer is a practicing attorney board certified in labor and employment law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and management consultant, author, public policy advocate and lecturer widely known for 30+ years working as an on demand, special project, consulting, general counsel or other basis with domestic and international business, charitable, community and government organizations of all types, sizes and industries and their leaders on labor and employment and other workforce compliance, performance management, internal controls and governance, compensation and benefits, regulatory compliance, investigations and audits, change management and restructuring, disaster preparedness and response and other operational, risk management and tactical concerns.

About Solutions Law Press, Inc.™

Comments Off on Justice Department & Wisconsin Officials Warn Falsifying COVID Vaccination Records Is Federal Crime | compliance, Corporate Compliance, COVID-19, Emergency, employee, Employer, Employers, Employment, Federal Sentencing Guidelines, Government Contractors, OFCCP | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Biden-Harris To Require many Employers To Mandate Employee Vaccinations

September 9, 2021

The Biden- Harris Administration today announced it will require a multitude of US employees to adopt and enforce workplace COVID-19 vaccination mandates for their workers.

The mandate requirement generally will apply to all federal workers, government contractors and subcontractors, health care workers of facilities participating in Medicare or Medicaid And any employer with more than 100 employees.All Medicare and Medicaid certified health care facilities, and a broad range of other employers must prepare to meet impending new federal COVID-19 vaccine mandates announced by the Biden-Harris Administration today.

According to today’s announcements all healthcare facilities participating in Medicare or Medicaid, Federal government employees, federal government contractors or subcontractors and any business employing 100 or more employees will be required to ensure all staff are vaccinated against COVID-19.

The Biden-Harris Administration says the new health industry COVID-19 vaccine will be implemented through emergency regulations to be issued in October.

According to today’s announcement, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Service (“CMS”) in collaboration with the Centers for Disease Control (“CDC”) will issue an Interim Final Rule with Comment Period for health care providers in October that will apply vaccine mandates hospitals, dialysis facilities, ambulatory surgical settings, nursing homes and home health agencies, among others, as a condition for participating in the Medicare and Medicaid programs. This announcement expends the healthcare industry mandate beyond it’s originally planned applicability to nursing homes when announced last month.

In addition to the health industry mandate, the Biden-Harris Administration also announcementI it would impose new vaccine mandates for all federal government workers, government contractors and subcontractors, and all employers employing more than 100 employees.

In it’s announcement of the impending vaccination requirements, CDC urged health care facilities to prepare now to meet the new mandate in October. CMS expects certified Medicare and Medicaid facilities to act in the best interest of patients and staff by complying with new COVID-19 vaccination requirements.

The Administration is urging covered workers not currently vaccinated to begin the vaccination process immediately and facilities and employers to use all available resources to support employee vaccinations, including employee education and clinics, as they work to meet new federal requirements.

Beyond potential federal program participation losses, the new vaccine mandates likely adds vaccination to the list of safety safeguards that employers can expect to be required to enforce as part of the occupational safety rules of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”).

While legal challenges to the mandate requirements are likely, most business andw that have not already adopted vaccine mandates are expected to adopt these mandates rather than face business losses and other sanctions.

Businesses that were supportive of mandates but fearful of the burdens of administering required accommodations under the Americans with Disabilities Act (”ADA”) or other civil rights laws are likely to welcome the Administration‘s new position. Unlike voluntary mandates, the ADA accommodation requirements do not apply to vaccination requirements required by law.

The new mandates also mean that businesses generally need to be concerned about potential OSHA exposure for failing to implement or enforce the mandates. OSHA already is sanctioning employers for violating COVID-19 related OSHA requirements. For instance, OSHA nailed Lakewood Resource and Referral Center Inc., dba Center for Education Medicine and Dentistry (CHEMED) with heavy fines for allegedly violating applicable COVID-19 safety guidelines in January, 2021.

In a July 23, 2021 citation letter, OSH proposes to fine CHEMED $273,064.00 for willfully violating OSHA by not providing a medical evaluation to determine each employee’s ability to use a N95 respirator, before the employee was fit tested or required to use the respirator in the workplace to protect against SARS-CoV-2 virus while testing suspected COVID-19 individuals.

In addition to the proposed fine, the citation also orders CHEMED to take a series of corrective actions and to post notices in the workplace informing workers of the violation.

Along with the CHEMED citation, OSH also cited a staffing agency contracted to provide nursing staffing to CHEMED, Homecare Therapies for also failing to conduct medical evaluations and fit tests. It received two violations and a proposed fine of $13,653.

In the face of these potential consequences, most covered health care facilities and other employers impacted by the mandate are likely to implement mandates unless and until these requirements are struct down by the courts or withdrawn.

Assuming the Administration follows appropriate procedures to adopt the rules, most legal commentators do not expect the legal challenges opposing the mandate orders to be successful in the courts particularly after the Supreme Court refused to overturn or hear arguments for overturning a unanimous decision of a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Klassen v. Trustees of Indiana University that refused to enjoin a vaccine mandate imposed by Indiana University as a condition of student or staff in person participation in classes or other activities.

While most healthcare and other covered businesses are not expected to challenge the rules, compliance us likely to trigger backlash from some unvaccinated workers strongly opposed to becoming vaccinated. Employers may find that some employees will resign their employment or take other tactics to avoid becoming vaccinated. Even those who elect to become vaccinated to retain their employment are likely to express opposition and dissatisfaction that could create liability exposures for the employers if it becomes a basis for retaliation claim.

Employers in Texas and certain other states that have adopted rules restricting or prohibiting vaccine, mask or other mandates also may face challenges based on the state rules.

In light of these and other uncertainties and challenges, Healthcare and Other or Employers generally should seek legal advice and assistance from legal counsel experienced with the relevant health care, labor and employment, privacy and other concerns.

More Information

This article is republished by permission of the author, Cynthia Marcotte Stamer. To review the original work, see here.

About the Author

Most widely recognized for her work with health care, life sciences, insurance and data and technology organizations, she also has worked extensively with health plan and insurance, employee benefits, financial, transportation, manufacturing, energy, real estate, accounting and other services, public and private academic and other education, hospitality, charitable, civic and other business, government and community organizations. and their leaders.

Ms. Stamer has extensive experience advising, representing, defending, and training domestic and international public and private business, charitable, community and governmental organizations and their leaders, employers, employee benefit plans, their fiduciaries and service providers, insurers, and others has published and spoken extensively on these concerns. As part of these involvements, she has worked, published and spoken extensively on these and other human resources, employee benefits, compensation, worker classification and other workforce and other services; insurance; health care; workers’ compensation and occupational disease; business reengineering, disaster and distress; and many other performance, risk management, compliance, public policy and regulatory affairs, and other operational concerns.

A former lead advisor to the Government of Bolivia on its pension project, Ms. Stamer also has worked internationally and domestically as an advisor to business, community and government leaders on these and other legislative, regulatory and other legislative and regulatory design, drafting, interpretation and enforcement, as well as regularly advises and represents organizations on the design, administration and defense of workforce, employee benefit and compensation, safety, discipline, reengineering, regulatory and operational compliance and other management practices and actions.

Ms. Stamer also serves in leadership of a broad range of professional and civic organizations and provides insights and thought leadership through her extensive publications, public speaking and volunteer service with a diverse range of organizations including as Chair of the American Bar Association (“ABA”) Intellectual Property Section Law Practice Management Committee, Vice Chair of the International Section Life Sciences and Health Committee, Past ABA RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Group Chair and Council Representative and current Welfare Benefit Committee Co-Chair, Past Chair of the ABA Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group, past Region IV Chair and national Society of Human Resources Management Consultant Forum Board Member, past Texas Association of Business BACPAC Chair, Regional Chair and Dallas Chapter Chair, former Vice President and Executive Director of the North Texas Health Care Compliance Professionals Association, past Board President of Richardson Development Center (now Warren Center) for Children Early Childhood Intervention Agency, past North Texas United Way Long Range Planning Committee Member, past Board Member and Compliance Chair of the National Kidney Foundation of North Texas, a Fellow in the American College of Employee Benefit Counsel, the American Bar Foundation and the Texas Bar Foundation and many others.

About Solutions Law Press, Inc.™

Comments Off on Biden-Harris To Require many Employers To Mandate Employee Vaccinations | Accommodation, ADA, board of directors, Civil Rights, Construction, Corporate Compliance, corporate governance, COVID, COVID-19, EEOC, employee, Employee Handbook, Employer, Employers, Employment, health Care, Hiring, Hospitality, HR, Human Resources, Internal Controls, Internal Investigations, Joint Employer, Management, OFCCP, Pandemic, Privacy, vaccination mandate, Worker, Workforce | Tagged: COVID, Employer, vaccine mandate | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

OSHA Cites Second Business For COVID Safety Violations

August 25, 2021

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”) has issued two citations against AMA Health Holdings LLC, for violating an OSHA emergency COVID standard published in June at its Seaside Guest Services transitional housing facility. Like OSHA’s July 23rd $273,064.00 citation of Lakewood Resource and Referral Center Inc. (“CHEMED”), the AMA Holdings citations and proposed penalties illustrate the risks health industry and other employers face for failing to comply with COVID-19 safety protocols.

The AMA Holdings citations stem from a complaint-driven OSHA investigation at the Seaside Guest Services’ residential housing facility in Trenton, New Jersey where 11 employees and 28 residents tested positive for the coronavirus by late March found numerous violations.

The residential facility provides transitional housing for people attending area behavioral-health programs and those who have completed some level of addiction treatment.

According to OSHA, its investigation of a complaint revealed that while Seaside Guest Services’ continuity of operations plan required that residents with coronavirus be isolated and workers notified, neither happened. Additionally, OSHA inspectors determined the facility provided protective masks to its employees, but did not enforce their use. Seaside also failed to enforce social distancing despite posting signs in its four housing units.

AMA Health Holdings LLC has 15 business days from receipt of its citations and penalties to comply, request an informal conference with OSHA’s area director, or contest the findings before the independent Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission.

The AMA Holdings OSHA actions demonstrate OSHA’s commitment to investigate complaints of violations is its COVID emergency standards and fine employers that violate them.

In the face of these enforcement actions, all employers should take care to ensure their ability to demonstrate and defend their operation’s compliance with all applicable emergency COVID safety standards and other safety requirements here.

As illustrated by the recently issued Centers for Disease Control (“CDC”) nursing home vaccination mandate announced last week, OSHA requirements evolve are likely to evolve rapidly in response to changing CDC guidance. Consequently, employers should remain vigilant for changing requirements and respond accordingly.

More Information

About the Author

About Solutions Law Press, Inc.™

Comments Off on OSHA Cites Second Business For COVID Safety Violations | board of directors, Brokers, Child Labor, compliance, Corporate Compliance, COVID-19, directors, Employer, Employers, Employment, HR, Human Resources, OSHA, Safety | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Heath Center Hit With $273K+ OSHA Fine For COVID-19 Safety Violations

August 5, 2021

Lakewood Resource and Referral Center Inc., dba Center for Education Medicine and Dentistry (CHEMED) faces heavy fines for allegedly violating the Occupational Safety & Health Act (“OSHA”) by violating Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSH”) COVID-19 safety guidelines in January, 2021.

In a July 23, 2021 citation letter, OSH proposes to fine CHEMED
$273,064.00 for willfully violating OSHA by not providing a medical evaluation to determine each employee’s ability
to use a N95 respirator, before the employee was fit tested or required to use the respirator in the workplace
to protect against SARS-CoV-2 virus while testing suspected COVID-19 individuals.

In addition to the proposed fine, the citation also orders CHEMED to take a series of corrective actions and to post notices in the workplace informing workers of the violation.

The citations and proposed penalties illustrate the risks health industry and other employers face for failing to comply with COVID-19 safety protocols.

To reduce their exposure for similar violations, health care providers and other employers should carefully monitor and comply with all OSH COVID-19 and other safety standards and ensure their staffing and other contractors also meet these conditions.

More Information

This article is republished by permission of the author, Cynthia Marcotte Stamer. To review the original work, see here.

About the Author

About Solutions Law Press, Inc.™

Comments Off on Heath Center Hit With $273K+ OSHA Fine For COVID-19 Safety Violations | Corporate Compliance, COVID-19, Employers, Employment, OSHA | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Model Notice & Related Guidance For Complying With COVID Bill COBRA Subsidy Rules Released; Send Notices & Begin Compliance ASAP

April 7, 2021

Group health plans, their plan administrators and fiduciaries, employer or other sponsors, administrative services providers and insurers should act quickly to distribute required notices using the regulatory guidance just released today (April 7, 2021) and take other actions needed to comply with the Consolidated Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 1985 (“COBRA”) coverage and premium subsidy notification, enrollment and coverage continuation requirements created by Section 9501 (the “COBRA Premium Assistance Rules”) of the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (“ARP ”) enacted last month.

The guidance package released today by the Employee Benefit Security Administration includes model notices and other preliminary guidance on the COBRA Premium Assistance Rules, which among other things require group health plans to notify “assistance eligible individuals” no later than May 31, 2021 of right under ARP Section 9501 to enroll in free COBRA Coverage during the ARP Premium Subsidy Period that began April 1, 2021.

As the deadline for providing notification to qualified beneficiaries is May 31, 2021 and the 60 day period for enrolling in COBRA coverage under the ARP COBRA Subsidy Rules does not begin until proper notification is provided, group health plan should move quickly to prepare and distribute the notifications and make other necessary plan arrangements.

This article provides an general overview of the ARP COBRA Premium Subsidy Rules and the Model Notices published by the Department of Labor Employee Benefit Security Administration (“EBSA”) on April 7, 2021 to assist group health plans and their administrators to comply with their notification obligations under these Rules. For a more comprehensive discussion of these requirements, see here.

New COVID COBRA Premium Subsidy Rules Overview

Section 9501 of the ARP seeks to help “assistance eligible individuals” continue their health benefits by providing assistance to maintain enrollment in covered group health plans by allowing them to enroll and maintain COBRA coverage under those plans without paying their COBRA continuation coverage premiums.

Covered group health plans generally include all group health plans sponsored by private-sector employers or employee organizations (unions) subject to the COBRA rules under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA); group health plans sponsored by State or local governments subject to the continuation provisions under the Public Health Service Act and group health insurance required to comply with state mini-COBRA laws.

In addition to mandating the provision of COBRA Coverage at no cost, no later than May 31, 2021, the ARP requires covered group health plans to notify certain former covered employees or dependents that qualify to enroll in COBRA coverage as “assistance eligible individuals” of their right within 60 days of notification to enroll in COBRA Coverage under the group health plan at no cost from April 1, 2021 through September 30, 2021 or, if earlier, the date their COBRA eligibility otherwise end (the “Premium Subsidy Period”).

From April 1 to September 31, 2021, group health plans cannot require an assistance eligible individual to pay any premiums for COBRA Coverage during his Premium Subsidy Period. ARP requires group health plans to provide COBRA Coverage without charge to assistance eligible individuals who qualify for and elect to enroll in COBRA Coverage with premium subsidy unless individual’s eligibility for COBRA or COBRA premium assistance ends before that date. Specific notifications to qualified beneficiaries also are required.

To implement these rules, ARP also requires that no later than May 31, 2021, covered group health plan administrators notify eligible qualified beneficiaries eligible to obtain COBRA coverage with premium assistance by applying for enrollment within the 60 day period following notification.

Assistance eligible individuals who timely enroll in COBRA Coverage with premium assistance generally must receive COBRA Coverage free of charge from the group health plan for any coverage period during the period that begins on or after April 1, 2021 until the earliest of the following dates (the “Premium Subsidy Period”):^[1]

The date the qualified beneficiary is eligible^[2] for coverage under any other group health plan (other than coverage consisting of only excepted benefits,^[3] coverage under a health flexible spending arrangement under Code Section 106(c)(2), coverage under a qualified small employer health reimbursement arrangement under Code Section 9831(d)(2) or eligible for benefits under the Medicare program under title XVIII of the Social Security Act;
The date of the expiration of the otherwise applicable maximum period of COBRA continuation coverage under Code Section 4980B (other than due to a failure to elect or discontinuation of coverage for nonpayment of COBRA premium that occurred before April 1, 2021).

Assistance eligible individuals generally are qualified beneficiaries who lost coverage under the group health plan due to an involuntary reduction in hours or termination of employment enrolled in COBRA Coverage between April 1, 2021 and September 31, 2021 including those qualifying event was an involuntary employment loss occurring during the 18-month period (29-months for individuals qualifying for extended COBRA eligibility due to disability) prior to April 1, 2021 not enrolled in COBRA as of April 1, 2021. This generally includes COBRA qualified beneficiaries whose loss of group health coverage results from an involuntary employment reduction or loss for a reason other than gross misconduct after ARP’s enactment on March 11, 2021 as well as qualified beneficiaries whose involuntary employment loss happened before the effective date who but for their previous failure to elect COBRA or to maintain COBRA Coverage would still be entitled to COBRA Coverage because less than 18 months (29 months for qualified beneficiaries disabled on the date of coverage loss who qualify for extension of the disability coverage period) has elapsed since their employment loss and an event has not occurred following the coverage termination that would terminate their COBRA eligibility before the end of such otherwise applicable maximum COBRA eligibility period. Group health plans must offer a second opportunity to enroll in COBRA Coverage with COBRA premium assistance to qualified beneficiaries eligible for premium assistance not enrolled in COBRA Coverage as of April 1, 2021.

Sponsoring employers or other plan sponsors may qualify to claim an employment tax credit for COBRA premiums paid on behalf of assistance eligible individuals. Guidance on these tax rules is pending.

Required Group Health Plan Notifications To Assistance Eligible Individuals

ARP requires group health plans to provide certain written notifications to qualified beneficiaries entitled to qualify to enroll in COBRA coverage with premium assistance. This generally includes a requirement to provide an initial notification of the availability of premium assistance for COBRA coverage to assistance eligible individuals by the later of May 31, 2021 and subsequently to provide notice of the impending termination of eligibility for the COBRA Premium Subsidy during the 30 day period that begins 45 days before eligibility for COBRA Premium Subsidy ends. ARP dictates the minimum required content of such notices. Failure to provide the required notification is a failure to meet the notice requirements under the applicable COBRA continuation provision that subjects the group health plan administer and its sponsor to liability.

While ARP allows plan administrators the option of designing their own notices and forms to fulfill this requirement, it also directed the Department of Labor in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary of Health and Human Services to develop model notices for plans to use for this purpose. In response to this directive, the Department of Labor EBSA on April 7, 2021 published the following model notices and forms for group health plans to use to fulfill their ARP COBRA Premium Subsidy Rule notification requirements:

More Information

The ARP COBRA Premium Subsidy Rules are only one of a plethora of COVID health care emergency driven regulatory and enforcement changes impacting employers and their employee benefit plans. If you need assistance or would like additional information about these or other legal, management or public policy developments, please contact the author Cynthia Marcotte Stamer via e-mail or via telephone at (214) 452 -8297.

Solutions Law Press, Inc. also invites you receive future updates by registering here and participating and contributing to the discussions in our Solutions Law Press, Inc. LinkedIn SLP Health Care Risk Management & Operations Group, HR & Benefits Update Compliance Group, and/or Coalition for Responsible Health Care Policy. If you or someone else you know would like to receive future updates about developments on these and other concerns, please be sure that we have your current contact information including your preferred e-mail by creating your profile here. For specific information about the these or other legal, management or public policy developments, please contact the author Cynthia Marcotte Stamer via e-mail or via telephone at (214) 452 -8297.

About the Author

Most widely recognized for her work with workforce, health care, life sciences, insurance and data and technology organizations, she also has worked extensively with health plan and insurance, employee benefits, financial, transportation, manufacturing, energy, real estate, accounting and other services, public and private academic and other education, hospitality, charitable, civic and other business, government and community organizations. and their leaders.

Ms. Stamer has extensive experience advising, representing, defending and training domestic and international public and private business, charitable, community and governmental organizations and their leaders, employee benefit plans, their fiduciaries and service providers, insurers, and others has published and spoken extensively on these concerns. As part of these involvements, she has worked, published and spoken extensively on these and other federal and state wage and hour and other compensation, discrimination, performance management, and other related human resources, employee benefits and other workforce and services; insurance; workers’ compensation and occupational disease; business reengineering, disaster and distress; and many other risk management, compliance, public policy and performance concerns.

For more information about these concerns or Ms. Stamer’s work, experience, involvements, other publications, or programs, see www.cynthiastamer.com or contact Ms. Stamer via e-mail here.

About Solutions Law Press, Inc.™

New COVID COBRA Premium Subsidy Rules Overview

The date the qualified beneficiary is eligible^[2] for coverage under any other group health plan (other than coverage consisting of only excepted benefits,^[3] coverage under a health flexible spending arrangement under Code Section 106(c)(2), coverage under a qualified small employer health reimbursement arrangement under Code Section 9831(d)(2) or eligible for benefits under the Medicare program under title XVIII of the Social Security Act;
The date of the expiration of the otherwise applicable maximum period of COBRA continuation coverage under Code Section 4980B (other than due to a failure to elect or discontinuation of coverage for nonpayment of COBRA premium that occurred before April 1, 2021).

Sponsoring employers or other plan sponsors may qualify to claim an employment tax credit for COBRA premiums paid on behalf of assistance eligible individuals. Guidance on these tax rules is pending.

Required Group Health Plan Notifications To Assistance Eligible Individuals

More Information

About the Author

For more information about these concerns or Ms. Stamer’s work, experience, involvements, other publications, or programs, see www.cynthiastamer.com or contact Ms. Stamer via e-mail here.

About Solutions Law Press, Inc.™

Comments Off on Model Notice & Related Guidance For Complying With COVID Bill COBRA Subsidy Rules Released; Send Notices & Begin Compliance ASAP | American Recovery Plan Act, board of directors, Brokers, COBRA, compliance, Corporate Compliance, COVID-19, directors, employee, Employee Benefits, Employment, Employment Policies, Employment Tax, Employment Termination, ERISA, Excepted Benefits, Fiduciary Responsibility, Fringe Benefit, Fringe Benefits, health benefit, Health Benefits, health Care, health insurance, Health Plans, Worker, Workforce | Tagged: ARP, COBRA, COVID, Employer, group health plan, Health Plan | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Businesses Face Increased Wage Costs & Risks From American Rescue Plan Act Of 2021 FLSA Minimum Wage Changes

March 2, 2021

U.S businesses will face sharply increased wage costs if Senate Democrats succeed in their plan to pass as soon as this week the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (the “Act”) passed by the House of Representatives on Friday, February 24, 2021.

One of many provisions impacting employers and their employee benefit plans in the Act that Congressional Democrats are pushing through as a COVID-19 relief package, Section 2101 of the Act amends the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (“FLSA”) to increase immediately upon enactment the federal minimum wage employers covered by the FLSA must pay to most non-exempt employees (“regular rate”) by $2.25 per hour from the current rate of $7.25 to $9.50 per hour, then provides for additional annual increases the gradual increase of the federal minimum wage that will raise the regular rate to $15.00 per hour over the next four years. Beginning in 2026, the Act also provides for annual increases in the regular rate based on the median hourly wage of all employees as determined by the Bureau of Labor Statistics rounded up to the nearest multiple of $0.05. This means the regular minimum wage employers must pay most hourly employees would more than double by 2025 and continue to increase thereafter.

In addition, the Act also phases out current rules allowing employers to pay tipped employees, new employees under age 20 and handicapped employees less than the regular minimum wage over the next five years and raises the minimum wage the FLSA allows employers to pay those employees gradually over the intervening period, with the initial increases slated to take effect upon enactment.

As Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has announced plans to bring the Act before the Senate for a vote as early as this week and President Biden committed to promptly sign the Act that is the centerpiece of the Democrats latest COVID-19 relief package, businesses are likely to feel the impact of the increased minimum wage and other mandates within days if not by month’s end.

These amendments will directly and immediately increase labor costs for non-exempt workers as well as employee benefit and fringe benefit costs and obligations tied to compensation or based on FLSA classifications. Other Biden-Harris Administration policies expanding the scope of the FLSA and other federal laws through revisions and enforcement of rules for characterizing workers as employees rather than independent contractors and enforcing expansive joint employer liability rules as well as other announced or expected Biden-Harris Administration proworker regulatory and enforcement changes almost certainly will expand the reach and implications of these changes. The Biden-Harris Administration’s January 20, 2021 Memorandum on Regulatory Freeze Pending Review suspended the implementation of the Trump Administration led Labor Department’s Final Rule: Independent Contractor Status under the Fair Labor Standards Act slated to take effect on March 8, 2021, which sought to restore and clarify historical more employer friendly policies for distinguishing employee versus independent contractor relationships for purposes of the FLSA, the WHD’s withdrawal of previously issued Trump Administration era opinions that applied that Administration’s more expansive view of independent contractor status, and WHD’s issuance of new opinions articulating and apply applying significantly narrower definitions of independent contractor and broader definitions of employees.

Based on the agenda announced by the Biden-Harris Administration, businesses also should expect the Biden-Harris Administration and private plaintiffs to use these more employee friendly interpretation and enforcement policies to attack employer characterizations of workers as contractors to justify nonpayment of minimum wage and overtime to those workers. Along with being forced to pay unpaid wages and overtime with interest, businesses unsuccessful in defending their worker classification characterizations can expect to face liquidated damage awards to private litigants equal to two times the amount of the back pay liability or in the case of WHD enforcement for repeated or willful violations, civil monetary penalties.

In assessing and managing these risks, businesses should evaluate their potential joint employer exposure to liability for unpaid minimum wage and overtime violations by other businesses providing labor or other services as the Biden-Harris Administration also is expected to seek to apply the much more expansive interpretation of joint employment applied during the Obama Administration abandoned during the Trump Administration.

These misclassification mistakes can be particularly costly. FLSA liabilities arising from misclassification of workers as independent contractors carry significant risk both because businesses often fail to pay required minimum wages or overtime as well as don’t keep required time records. The Biden-Harris Administration has made clear that it plans to move quickly to reimplement the regulatory and enforcement practices used during the Obama Administration to aggressively challenge employers’ characterization of workers as exempt from the FLSA’s minimum wage and overtime rules as independent contractors.

Considering these developments, all U.S. businesses and business leaders are well-advised both to begin preparing to comply with anticipated increases in federal minimum wage rates, as well as well as assess and take appropriate steps to mitigate their exposure to anticipated aggressive efforts to reclassify service providers considered to perform work as independent contractors, as contractors or employees of subcontractors or other businesses or both.

More Information

The FLSA reforms are only one of a number of provisions of the Act impacting employers and their employee benefit plans. For more a more comprehensive discussion of the FLSA amendments included in the Act, see here.

About the Author

For more information about these concerns or Ms. Stamer’s work, experience, involvements, other publications, or programs, see www.cynthiastamer.com or contact Ms. Stamer via e-mail here.

About Solutions Law Press, Inc.™

Comments Off on Businesses Face Increased Wage Costs & Risks From American Rescue Plan Act Of 2021 FLSA Minimum Wage Changes | board of directors, Brokers, Civil Monetary Penalties, compensation, compliance, Construction, Corporate Compliance, corporate governance, COVID-19, directors, Economy, employee, Employee Benefits, Employees Under Age 20, Employer, Employers, Employment, Employment Policies, Fair Labor Standards Act, Fringe Benefit, Fringe Benefits, Government Contractors, government employer, Handicapped Employee, health benefit, Health Benefits, Health Plans, Hiring, Hospitality, HR, Human Resources, insurers, Joint Employer, Labor Management Relations, Labor Management Relations, Leadership, Management, Overtime, tipped employee, Tipped Employee | Tagged: American Resue Plan Act of 2021, Compensation, COVID-19 Relief, Employer, Fair Labor Standards Act, FLSA, Minimum Wage, wage and hour | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

To 2/18 Complimentary Update On Proposed COVID Relief Provisions Impacting Employers & Employee Benefit Plans

February 12, 2021

Register for 2/18 Complimentary Zoom Briefing

Solutions Law Press, Inc.™ invites employers, employee benefit plan fiduciaries and vendors and other impacted business leaders participate in a complimentary briefing on the employer and employee benefit requirements of the H.R. 6379, Take Responsibility for Workers and Families Act as approved by the Ways & Means Committee as of February 12, 2021. The live Zoom briefing now will begin at 9:00 a.m. Central Time on Thursday, February 18, 2021 to avoid potential weather-related power and other disruptions associated with winter storms at its originally scheduled presentation time on Monday, February 15.

Employers and employee benefit plan fiduciaries and vendors should get up to speed on a new mandate to subsidize health coverage continuation and other requirements of the Act that the House Ways & Means Committee voted on February 11, 2021 to include in the lasted COVID-19 relief package the Democrat Majority plans to fast track through Congress. By the end of February if not before, Congress is expected to pass a final COVID-19 relief package including these employer and employee benefit plan mandates in substantially the same form as approved by the Ways and Means Committee. As these provisions will require quick action by employers and plans, employers, employee benefit plans, their fiduciaries and plan vendors should begin preparing now to comply with the anticipated new requirements

Registration & Program Details

Solutions Law Press, Inc. will host the 30-minute Zoom briefing beginning at 9:00 a.m. Central Time on Thursday, February 18, 2021 on the current provisions of the Act. The briefing will be conducted attorney Cynthia Marcotte Stamer. Participation is complimentary, but space is limited. Accordingly, registration is required and registration and participation will be granted on a first come, first serve basis here.

About Presenter Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

A Fellow in the American College of Employee Benefits Counsel, Board Certified in Labor and Employment Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and recognized by her peers as a Martindale-Hubble “AV-Preeminent” (Top 1%) and “Top Rated Lawyer” with special recognition LexisNexis® Martindale-Hubbell® as “LEGAL LEADER™ Texas Top Rated Lawyer” in Health Care Law and Labor and Employment Law; as among the “Best Lawyers In Dallas” for her work in the fields of “Labor & Employment,” “Tax: ERISA & Employee Benefits,” “Health Care” and “Business and Commercial Law” by D Magazine, Cynthia Marcotte Stamer is a practicing attorney, 30+ years working as an on demand, special project, consulting, general counsel or other basis with domestic and international business, employee benefit plan, health care, insurance, financial service, charitable, community and government organizations of all types, sizes and industries and their leaders on labor and employment and other workforce, employee benefits and compensation, performance management, internal controls, governance, regulatory and operational compliance, investigations and audits, change management and restructuring, disaster preparedness and response and other operational, risk management and tactical concerns. Best known for her leading edge work and thought leadership on workforce management and reengineering and health and other employee benefits concerns, Ms. Stamer regularly advises and represents organizations on the design, administration and defense of workforce, employee benefit and compensation, safety, discipline, reengineering, regulatory and operational compliance and other management practices and actions. Along with advising and representing management organizations, Ms. Stamer also has worked continuously throughout her career internationally and domestically as an advisor to business, community and government leaders on health care, savings and retirement, workforce, and other legislative and regulatory design, drafting, interpretation, enforcement and other domestic and international public policy.

For more information about these concerns or Ms. Stamer’s work, experience, involvements, other publications, or programs, see www.cynthiastamer.com or contact Ms. Stamer via e-mailhere.

About Solutions Law Press, Inc.™

Solutions Law Press, Inc. invites you receive future updates by registering on our Solutions Law Press, Inc. Website and participating and contributing to the discussions in our Solutions Law Press, Inc. LinkedIn SLP Health Care Risk Management & Operations Group, HR & Benefits Update Compliance Group, and/or Coalition for Responsible Health Care Policy Group.

Comments Off on To 2/18 Complimentary Update On Proposed COVID Relief Provisions Impacting Employers & Employee Benefit Plans | 401(k), Absenteeism, Association Health Plan, Bankruptcy, board of directors, Brokers, COBRA, Corporate Compliance, COVID, COVID-19, defined benefit plan, defined contribution plan, Disaster, employee, Employee Benefits, Employer, Employers, Employment, Employment Policies, Employment Termination, ERISA, exchange, Family Leave, health benefit, Health Benefits, health Care, health insurance, health insurance marketplace, health plan, Health Plans, Hiring, HR, Human Resources, Insurance, insurers, Internal Controls, Labor Management Relations, Management, Pandemic, Patient Empowerment, Patient Protection & Affordable Care Act, pension plan, Plan Admistrator, Premium Subsidies, Retirement Plans | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Ways & Means Committee Approves New COVID Relief Employer COBRA Subsidy Mandate

February 11, 2021

Register For 2/15 Zoom Briefing

Employers and employee benefit plan fiduciaries and vendors should prepare to face a new mandate to subsidize health coverage continuation and other requirements included in the H.R. 6379, Take Responsibility for Workers and Families Act that the House Ways & Means Committee approved for inclusion in the COVID-19 relief package the Democrat Majority plans to fast track to enactment.

The proposed COBRA subsidy mandate is one of several COVID-19 relief provisions impacting employers and their benefit programs the Ways & Means Committee marked up and reported out of committee the week ending February 12, 2021. Other provisions include:

Additional direct assistance that would increase the COVID direct payment for qualifying working families by an additional direct payment of $1,400 per person, bringing their total relief to $2,000 per person;

Extend temporary federal unemployment and benefits with increased weekly benefits;

Significantly enhanced Earned Income Tax Credits for workers without children;

Raising the Child Tax Credit to $3,000 per child ($3,600 for children under 6), and makes it fully refundable and advanceable;

Expanding the Child and Dependent Tax Credit (CDCTC) to allow families to claim up to half of their child care expenses;

Reducing health care premiums for low- and middle-income families by increasing the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) premium tax credits for 2021 and 2022;

Creating health care subsidies for unemployed workers who are ineligible for COBRA;

A program to bail out insolvent and distressed multiemployer (union) pension plans; and

More.

Revised legislative language of these and other proposals before the Ways and Means Committee markup this week is emerging and could face further changes as Congressional Democrats continue to work to enact their latest COVID-Relief package. Employers and employee benefit leaders and advisors should monitor carefully and begin preparing to respond to these proposals.

Register & Attend Complimentary 2/15 Briefing

Solutions Law Press, Inc. will host the 30-minute Zoom briefing beginning at 9:00 a.m. Central Time on Monday, February 15, 2020 on the current provisions of the Act. The briefing will be conducted attorney Cynthia Marcotte Stamer. Participation is complimentary, but space is limited. Accordingly, registration is required and registration and participation will be granted on a first come, first serve basis here.

For more information contact the author of this update, Texas Board of Legal Specialization Board Certified Labor and Employment Lawyer, Cynthia Marcotte Stamer here.

More Information

We hope this update is helpful. For more information about the these or other health or other legal, management or public policy developments, please contact the author Cynthia Marcotte Stamer via e-mail or via telephone at (214) 452 -8297.

About the Author

Ms. Stamer has extensive experience advising, representing, defending and training domestic and international public and private business, charitable, community and governmental organizations and their leaders, employee benefit plans, their fiduciaries and service providers, insurers, and others has published and spoken extensively on these concerns. As part of these involvements, she has worked, published and spoken extensively on these and federal and state discrimination, affirmative action and accommodation and other related human resources, employee benefits and other workforce and services; insurance; workers’ compensation and occupational disease; business reengineering, disaster and distress; and many other risk management and compliance concerns.

For more information about these concerns or Ms. Stamer’s work, experience, involvements, other publications, or programs, see www.cynthiastamer.com or contact Ms. Stamer via e-mail here.

About Solutions Law Press, Inc.™

Solutions Law Press, Inc. invites you receive future updates by registering here and participating and contributing to the discussions in our Solutions Law Press, Inc. LinkedIn SLP Health Care Risk Management & Operations Group, HR & Benefits Update Compliance Group, and/or Coalition for Responsible Health Care Policy. If you or someone else you know would like to receive future updates about developments on these and other concerns, please be sure that we have your current contact information including your preferred e-mail by creating your profile here. ©2021 Cynthia Marcotte Stamer. Non-exclusive right to republish granted to Solutions Law Press, Inc.™

Comments Off on Ways & Means Committee Approves New COVID Relief Employer COBRA Subsidy Mandate | ACA, compliance, Corporate Compliance, COVID-19, Defined Benefit Plans, Disaster, EBSA, Emergency, employee, Employee Benefits, Employer, Employers, Employment, Employment Policies, Employment Tax, Employment Termination, ERISA, health benefit, Health Benefits, health insurance marketplace, health plan, Health Plans, pension plan, Premium Subsidies, Retirement Plans, Retirements, Risk Management, Stimulus Bill, third party administrators, Unemployment Benefits, Unemployment Insurance, Union, Worker, Workforce | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Prepare To Respond To Biden-Harris Plan To Beat COVID-19 & Other Administration Policy & Enforcement Priorities

January 21, 2021

Newly sworn in President Joe Biden chose to make an executive order outlining the core principles for his Administration’s policy for fighting COVID-19 the first signed in his new Administration shortly after he was sworn in as President as well as made public the Biden-Harris Administration’s other key policy priorities upon taking office which promise to significantly impact business and other organizations, taxpayers and others. As the Administration and new Congress get to work on these and other policies, American businesses and citizens should stay informed and provide clear and consistent input to the Administration and members of Congress about the policy and enforcement proposals and actions to help shape the law and prepare to deal with the new rules and priorities.

Key Biden-Harris Administration Policy Priorities

President Biden will deliver bold action and immediate relief for American families as the country grapples with converging crises. This will include actions to control the COVID-19 pandemic, provide economic relief, tackle climate change, and advance racial equity and civil rights, as well as immediate actions to reform our immigration system and restore America’s standing in the world.

COVID-19

President Biden will move quickly to contain the COVID-19 crisis by expanding testing, safely reopening schools and businesses, and taking science-driven steps to address the communities — especially communities of color — who have been hardest hit by this virus. And, President Biden will launch a national vaccination program to inoculate the U.S. population efficiently and equitably.

Read more about the Biden-Harris plan to beat COVID-19 [See below].

Climate

President Biden will take swift action to tackle the climate emergency. The Biden Administration will ensure we meet the demands of science, while empowering American workers and businesses to lead a clean energy revolution.

Racial Equity

The promise of our nation is that every American has an equal chance to get ahead, yet persistent systemic racism and barriers to opportunity have denied this promise for so many. President Biden is putting equity at the center of the agenda with a whole of government approach to embed racial justice across Federal agencies, policies, and programs. And President Biden will take bold action to advance a comprehensive equity agenda to deliver criminal justice reform, end disparities in healthcare access and education, strengthen fair housing, and restore Federal respect for Tribal sovereignty, among other actions, so that everyone across America has the opportunity to fulfill their potential.

Economy

President Biden will take bold steps to address the inequities in our economy and provide relief to those who are struggling during the COVID-19 pandemic. The President will also work with Congress to pass the American Rescue Plan to change the course of the pandemic, build a bridge towards economic recovery, and invest in racial justice. And, he will build our economy back better from the pandemic and create millions of jobs by strengthening small businesses and investing in the jobs of the future.

Health Care

President Biden will make a renewed commitment to protect and expand Americans’ access to quality, affordable health care. He will build on the Affordable Care Act to meet the health care needs created by the pandemic, reduce health care costs, and make our health care system less complex to navigate.

Immigration

President Biden will reform our long-broken and chaotic immigration system. President Biden’s strategy is centered on the basic premise that our country is safer, stronger, and more prosperous with a fair and orderly immigration system that welcomes immigrants, keeps families together, and allows people across the country—both newly arrived immigrants and people who have lived here for generations—to more fully contribute to our country.

Restoring America’s Global Standing

President Biden will take steps to restore America’s standing in the world, strengthening the U.S. national security workforce, rebuilding democratic alliances across the globe, championing America’s values and human rights, and equipping the American middle class to succeed in a global economy.

COVID-19 Plan To Beat COVID-19

The first Executive Order signed by President Biden in furtherance of these initiatives was his COVID-19: The Biden-Harris plan to beat COVID-19 Executive Oder, the text of which reads as follows:

The American people deserve an urgent, robust, and professional response to the growing public health and economic crisis caused by the coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak. President Biden believes that the federal government must act swiftly and aggressively to help protect and support our families, small businesses, first responders, and caregivers essential to help us face this challenge, those who are most vulnerable to health and economic impacts, and our broader communities – not to blame others or bail out corporations.

The Biden-Harris administration will always:

Listen to science
Ensure public health decisions are informed by public health professionals
Promote trust, transparency, common purpose, and accountability in our government
President Biden and Vice President Harris have a seven-point plan to beat COVID-19.

Ensure all Americans have access to regular, reliable, and free testing.

Double the number of drive-through testing sites.
Invest in next-generation testing, including at home tests and instant tests, so we can scale up our testing capacity by orders of magnitude.
Stand up a Pandemic Testing Board like Roosevelt’s War Production Board. It’s how we produced tanks, planes, uniforms, and supplies in record time, and it’s how we will produce and distribute tens of millions of tests.
Establish a U.S. Public Health Jobs Corps to mobilize at least 100,000 Americans across the country with support from trusted local organizations in communities most at risk to perform culturally competent approaches to contact tracing and protecting at-risk populations.
Fix personal protective equipment (PPE) problems for good.

President Biden is taking responsibility and giving states, cities, tribes, and territories the critical supplies they need.

Fully use the Defense Production Act to ramp up production of masks, face shields, and other PPE so that the national supply of personal protective equipment exceeds demand and our stores and stockpiles — especially in hard-hit areas that serve disproportionately vulnerable populations — are fully replenished.
Build immediately toward a future, flexible American-sourced and manufactured capability to ensure we are not dependent on other countries in a crisis.
Provide clear, consistent, evidence-based guidance for how communities should navigate the pandemic – and the resources for schools, small businesses, and families to make it through.

Social distancing is not a light switch. It is a dial. President Biden will direct the CDC to provide specific evidence-based guidance for how to turn the dial up or down relative to the level of risk and degree of viral spread in a community, including when to open or close certain businesses, bars, restaurants, and other spaces; when to open or close schools, and what steps they need to take to make classrooms and facilities safe; appropriate restrictions on size of gatherings; when to issue stay-at-home restrictions.
Establish a renewable fund for state and local governments to help prevent budget shortfalls, which may cause states to face steep cuts to teachers and first responders.
Call on Congress to pass an emergency package to ensure schools have the additional resources they need to adapt effectively to COVID-19.
Provide a “restart package” that helps small businesses cover the costs of operating safely, including things like plexiglass and PPE.

Plan for the effective, equitable distribution of treatments and vaccines — because development isn’t enough if they aren’t effectively distributed.

Invest $25 billion in a vaccine manufacturing and distribution plan that will guarantee it gets to every American, cost-free.
Ensure that politics plays no role in determining the safety and efficacy of any vaccine. The following 3 principles will guide the Biden-Harris administration: Put scientists in charge of all decisions on safety and efficacy; publicly release clinical data for any vaccine the FDA approves; and authorize career staff to write a written report for public review and permit them to appear before Congress and speak publicly uncensored.
Ensure everyone — not just the wealthy and well-connected — in America receives the protection and care they deserve, and consumers are not price gouged as new drugs and therapies come to market.

Protect older Americans and others at high risk.

President Biden understands that older Americans and others at high-risk are most vulnerable to COVID-19.

Establish a COVID-19 Racial and Ethnic Disparities Task Force, as proposed by Vice President Harris, to provide recommendations and oversight on disparities in the public health and economic response. At the end of this health crisis, it will transition to a permanent Infectious Disease Racial Disparities Task Force.
Create the Nationwide Pandemic Dashboard that Americans can check in real-time to help them gauge whether local transmission is actively occurring in their zip codes. This information is critical to helping all individuals, but especially older Americans and others at high risk, understand what level of precaution to take.
Rebuild and expand defenses to predict, prevent, and mitigate pandemic threats, including those coming from China.

Immediately restore the White House National Security Council Directorate for Global Health Security and Biodefense, originally established by the Obama-Biden administration.
Immediately restore our relationship with the World Health Organization, which — while not perfect — is essential to coordinating a global response during a pandemic.
Re-launch and strengthen U.S. Agency for International Development’s pathogen-tracking program called PREDICT.
Expand the number of CDC’s deployed disease detectives so we have eyes and ears on the ground, including rebuilding the office in Beijing.
Implement mask mandates nationwide by working with governors and mayors and by asking the American people to do what they do best: step up in a time of crisis.

Experts agree that tens of thousands of lives can be saved if Americans wear masks. President Biden will continue to call on:

Every American to wear a mask when they are around people outside their household.
Every Governor to make that mandatory in their state.
Local authorities to also make it mandatory to buttress their state orders.
Once we succeed in getting beyond this pandemic, we must ensure that the millions of Americans who suffer long-term side effects from COVID don’t face higher premiums or denial of health insurance because of this new pre-existing condition. The Biden-Harris Administration will work to ensure that the protections for those with pre-existing conditions that were won with Obamacare are protected. And, they will work to lower health care costs and expand access to quality, affordable health care through a Medicare-like public option.

Monitor & Respond To Emerging Developments & Proposals

As the new Administration and Congress get down to work, all U.S. organizations and communities, their leaders, and individual employees and citizens should carefully follow, and share their input to the Administration, members of Congress, and other federal, state and local officials on the actions and proposals taken to implement this and other policy that impact their interests.

More Information

Solutions Law Press, Inc. invites you receive future updates by registering on our Solutions Law Press, Inc. Website and participating and contributing to the discussions in our Solutions Law Press, Inc. LinkedIn SLP Health Care Risk Management & Operations Group, HR & Benefits Update Compliance Group, and/or Coalition for Responsible Health Care Policy.

About the Author

An attorney board certified in labor and employment law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and Fellow in the American College of Employee Benefit Counsel, Ms. Stamer has worked as an on demand, special project, consulting, general counsel or other basis with health and other employee benefit plans, their sponsors, insurers, administrators, providers and others and others has published and spoken extensively on these concerns.

A former lead advisor to the Government of Bolivia on its pension project, Ms. Stamer also has worked internationally and domestically as an advisor and advocate for employer and other plan sponsors, fiduciaries, administrators, insurers, technology and other service providers, managed care organizations, direct primary care and other health care providers and others on these and other legislative, regulatory and other legislative and regulatory design, drafting, interpretation and enforcement, as well as regularly advises and represents organizations on the design, administration and defense of workforce, employee benefit and compensation, safety, discipline, reengineering, regulatory and operational compliance and other management practices and actions.

For more information about these concerns or Ms. Stamer’s work, experience, involvements, other publications, or programs, see www.cynthiastamer.com or contact Ms. Stamer via e-mail here.

About Solutions Law Press, Inc.™

If you or someone else you know would like to receive future updates about developments on these and other concerns, please be sure that we have your current contact information including your preferred e-mail by creating your profile here. ©2021 Cynthia Marcotte Stamer. Non-exclusive right to republish granted to Solutions Law Press, Inc.™

Comments Off on Prepare To Respond To Biden-Harris Plan To Beat COVID-19 & Other Administration Policy & Enforcement Priorities | compliance, Corporate Compliance, COVID-19, Economy, Emergency, Employee Benefits, Employer, Employers, health insurance, health insurance marketplace, health plan, Health Plans | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

Employer Option To Defer Paying Some Employee Payroll Taxes Until 2021

September 3, 2020

Employers now have the option temporarily to defer paying the employee portion (but not employer’s portion) of certain payroll taxes due between September 1, 2020 to December 31, 2020 for employees earning less than $4000 on a bi-weekly basis.

U.S. Department of the Treasury Notice 2020-65, Relief with Respect to Employment Tax Deadlines Applicable to Employers Affected by the Ongoing Coronavirus (COVID-19) Disease 2019 Pandemic (the “Notice”) issued on August 28, 2020 implements President Trump’s directive in his August 8, 2020 Memorandum on Deferring Payroll Tax Obligations in Light of the Ongoing COVID-19 Disaster (the “Memorandum”) that the Treasury Department allow the deferral of the employee portion of federal payroll taxes (6.2% for Social Security and 1.45% for Medicare) (“Employee Payroll Taxes”) from September 1, 2020 until December 31, 2020 for workers earning less than $4,000 on a biweekly basis (roughly $104,000 annually).

The Notice implements the Memorandum by confirming that employers may (but are not required to) elect to defer the payment of the Employee Payroll Taxes otherwise due on “applicable wages” until next year, after which payment of the deferred Employee Payroll Taxes will be required in installments between January 1, 2021 and April 30, 2021. The option to defer does not, however, extend to the payment of the employer’s portion of payroll taxes. An employer remains obligated timely to pay its employer payroll taxes whether or not the employer elects to take advantage of the Notice’s option to defer paying its employees’ portion of the taxes until 2021.

Employers contemplating this option must keep in mind that the Notice only delays the deadline for the employer to pay the employee portion of the payroll taxes. Employers deferring payment of Employee Payroll Taxes under the Notice remain obligated to pay these taxes to the federal government by the end of April 2021. Employers also will need to consider what arrangements, if any, the employer will make to collect deferred employee payroll taxes from the employee.

More Information

We hope this update is helpful. For more information about this or other health care, human resources, employee benefits, or other legal, operational or risk management developments and strategies, please contact the author Cynthia Marcotte Stamer via e-mail or via telephone at (214) 452 -8297.

Solutions Law Press, Inc. provides a broad range of publications and other information, education and other resources and tools to assist management leaders to manage people, process, risk and operations.

Solutions Law Press, Inc. invites you receive future updates by registering on our Solutions Law Press, Inc. Website and participating and contributing to the discussions in our Solutions Law Press, Inc. LinkedIn SLP Health Care Risk Management & Operations Group, HR & Benefits Update Compliance Group, and/or Coalition for Responsible Health Care Policy.

About the Author

Recognized by her peers as a Martindale-Hubble “AV-Preeminent” (Top 1%) and “Top Rated Lawyer” with special recognition LexisNexis® Martindale-Hubbell® as “LEGAL LEADER™ Texas Top Rated Lawyer” in Law and Labor and Employment Law and Health Care; as among the “Best Lawyers In Dallas” for her work in the fields of “Labor & Employment,” “Tax: ERISA & Employee Benefits,” “Health Care” and “Business and Commercial Law” by D Magazine, and a Fellow in the American College of Employee Benefit Counsel, the American Bar Foundation and the Texas Bar Foundation, Cynthia Marcotte Stamer is a practicing attorney board certified in labor and employment law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and management consultant, author, public policy advocate and lecturer widely known for 30+ years of human resources, employee benefits, compensation and other management work, public policy leadership and advocacy, coaching, teachings, and publications.

Ms. Stamer’s work throughout her 30 plus year career has focused heavily on working with health care and managed care, health and other employee benefit plan, insurance and financial services, construction, manufacturing, staffing and workforce and other public and private organizations and their technology, data, and other service providers and advisors domestically and internationally with legal and operational compliance and risk management, performance and workforce management, regulatory and public policy and other legal and operational concerns. As a part of this work, she has continuously and extensively worked with domestic and international employer and other management, employee benefit and other clients on payroll, income and other related tax, workers classification, wage and hour, compensation, benefits, performance, discipline, change and crisis management, internal and agency investigations and defense and a wide range of other workforce matters.

Author of hundreds of highly regarded books, articles and other publications, Ms. Stamer also is widely recognized for her scholarship, coaching, legislative and regulatory advocacy, leadership and mentorship on wage and hour, worker classification and a diverse range of other labor and employment, employee benefits, health and safety, education, performance management, privacy and data security, leadership and governance, and other management concerns within the American Bar Association (ABA), the International Information Security Association, the Southwest Benefits Association, and a variety of other international, national and local professional, business and civic organizations including highly regarded works on worker reclassification and joint employment liability under the FLSA and other laws published by the Bureau of National Affairs and others. Examples of these involvements include her service as the ABA Intellectual Property Law Section Law Practice Management Committee; the ABA International Section Life Sciences and Health Committee Vice Chair-Policy; a Scribe for the ABA Joint Committee on Employee Benefits (JCEB) Annual OCR Agency Meeting and a former JCEB Council Representative and Marketing Chair; Past Chair of the ABA RPTE Employee Benefits and Other Compensation Group and Vice Chair of its Law Practice Management Committee; Past Chair of the ABA Managed Care & Insurance Interest Group; former Vice President and Executive Director of the North Texas Health Care Compliance Professionals Association, past Southwest Benefits Association Board member; past Texas Association of Business State Board Member, BACPAC Committee Meeting, Regional and Dallas Chapter Chair; past Dallas Bar Association Employee Benefits Committee Executive Committee; former SHRM Region IV Chair and National Consultants Forum Board Member; for WEB Network of Benefit Professionals National Board Member and Dallas Chapter Chair; former Dallas World Affairs Council Board Member; founding Board Member, past President and Patient Empowerment and Health Care Heroes founder for the Alliance for Health Care Excellence; former Gulf States TEGE Council Exempt Organizations Coordinator and Board member; past Board President of Richardson Development Center (now Warren Center) for Children Early Childhood Intervention Agency, past North Texas United Way Long Range Planning Committee Member, and past Board Member and Compliance Chair of the National Kidney Foundation of North Texas, and involvement in a broad range of other professional and civic organizations. For more information about Ms. Stamer or her health industry and other experience and involvements, see http://www.cynthiastamer.com or contact Ms. Stamer via telephone at (214) 452-8297 or via e-mail here.

About Solutions Law Press, Inc.™

NOTICE: These statements and materials are for general informational and purposes only. They do not establish an attorney-client relationship, are not legal advice or an offer or commitment to provide legal advice, and do not serve as a substitute for legal advice. Readers are urged to engage competent legal counsel for consultation and representation in light of the specific facts and circumstances presented in their unique circumstance at any particular time. No comment or statement in this publication is to be construed as legal advice or an admission. The author reserves the right to qualify or retract any of these statements at any time. Likewise, the content is not tailored to any particular situation and does not necessarily address all relevant issues. Because the law is rapidly evolving and rapidly evolving rules makes it highly likely that subsequent developments could impact the currency and completeness of this discussion. The author and Solutions Law Press, Inc. disclaim, and have no responsibility to provide any update or otherwise notify anyone any such change, limitation, or other condition that might affect the suitability of reliance upon these materials or information otherwise conveyed in connection with this program. Readers may not rely upon, are solely responsible for, and assume the risk and all liabilities resulting from their use of this publication.

©2020 Cynthia Marcotte Stamer. Non-exclusive right to republish granted to Solutions Law Press, Inc.™ For information about republication, please contact the author directly. All other rights reserved.

Comments Off on Employer Option To Defer Paying Some Employee Payroll Taxes Until 2021 | Corporate Compliance, COVID, COVID-19, employee, Employee Benefits, Employee Handbook, Employer, Employers, Employment, Employment Agreement, Employment Tax, government employer, Joint Employer, Pandemic, Retirement Plans, Unemployment Benefits | Permalink
Posted by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

For Help With Comments, Investigations Or Other Needs

Other Helpful Resources & Information

More Information

About the Author

More Information

About the Author

About Solutions Law Press, Inc.™

OSHA COVID-19 ETS

Employers Face Significant Continuing Risks Despite Preliminary Injunctions Against COVID Vaccine Rules

More Information

About the Author

About Solutions Law Press, Inc.™

ETS & Other Federal Vaccine Mandates

OSHA COVID-19 ETS

Litigation Challenging ETS & Other Federal Vaccine Mandates

Employers Face Significant Continuing Risks Despite Preliminary Injunctions Against COVID Vaccine Rules

More Information

About the Author

About Solutions Law Press, Inc.™

More Information

About the Author

About Solutions Law Press, Inc.™

Biden Administration COVID-19 Vaccination Strategy

More Information

More Information

About the Author

About Solutions Law Press, Inc.™

Registration & Program Details

About Presenter Cynthia Marcotte Stamer

About Solutions Law Press, Inc.™

Key Biden-Harris Administration Policy Priorities

COVID-19 Plan To Beat COVID-19

More Information

About the Author

About Solutions Law Press, Inc.™

Email Subscription

Pages

Recent Posts

Archives

Share this blog

Blogroll

Solutions Law

Solutions Law Press HR & Benefits Update