Effective June 19, 2024, New York State Labor Law Section 206-c requires all private and public employers to provide 30 minutes of paid break time for employees to express breast milk when the employee has a reasonable need to express breast milk. Prior to enactment of this law, New York State employers were only required to provide reasonable unpaid break time for breast milk expression.

The New York State Department of Labor (NYSDOL) has issued guidance FAQs on the amended law. NYSDOL’s guidance provides that paid break time must be permitted as often as an employee reasonably needs to express breast milk. NYSDOL has issued a template Policy on the Rights of Employees to Express Breast Milk in the Workplace which provides:

HOW OFTEN DURING THE WORKDAY CAN I TAKE BREAKS TO PUMP BREAST MILK? The number of paid breaks an employee will need is unique to each employee. Your employer must accommodate you whenever you reasonably need to take a break to express milk.

Employees must also be permitted to use existing paid break or meal time if they need additional time for breast milk expression beyond the paid 30 minutes, and employers may not require employees to make up this missed work time. Employees are entitled to paid breaks for breastmilk expression for up to three years following childbirth.

Employers are required to provide written notice of breast milk expression rights to all employees at the time of hire and then annually thereafter. Additionally, notice must be provided when an employee returns from childbirth leave.

Employees must provide reasonable advance notice of their need for lactation breaks. As a reminder, employers must continue to provide a room or other location to express breast milk once an employee submits a written request to their direct supervisor or an individual designated by the employer to process lactation room requests. Employers must respond to lactation room requests in writing within five days.

Lactation rooms must have the following:

• Be close to an employee’s work area
• Provide good natural or artificial light
• Be private – both shielded from view and free from intrusion 
• Have accessible, clean running water nearby
• Have an electrical outlet (if the workplace is supplied with electricity)
• Include a chair
• Provide a desk, small table, counter or other flat surface
• Ability to store pumped breast milk in a refrigerator if one is available

Employers are prohibited from discriminating in any way against an employee who chooses to express breast milk in the workplace.  

If you have any questions about the information presented in this news alert, please contact Laura Harshbarger, Lance Willoughby-Hudson, any attorney in Bond’s labor and employment practice or the Bond attorney with whom you are regularly in contact.

On May 20, 2024, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s (OSHA) announced a final rule updating the Hazard Communication Standard (HCS). The amended rule (29 CFR 1910) better aligns with the United Nations’ Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS).

Read More >> OSHA Issues Final Rule on HazCom Standard

In a 3-2 vote on April 23, 2024, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) issued its final rule on non-compete clauses, declaring all non-compete clauses to be unfair methods of competition, resulting in a national ban on non-compete clauses.

Read More >> Non-Compete Clauses May Be A Thing Of The Past: Analyzing the FTC’s Final Rule Banning Non-Compete Clauses

New York has long protected its residents from discrimination in the job hiring process with the New York State Human Rights Law (NYSHRL), which was originally passed in 1945.  New York City also has its own Human Rights Law (NYCHRL) that further covers discrimination in job hiring.

Read More >> Out of State, Keep Them in Mind: New York Anti-Discrimination Laws Extend to Nonresident Job Applicants and Employees

On May 31, 2024, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s (OSHA) new “Walkaround” rule will take effect. The amended rule (29 CFR 1903.8(c)) is a sea change for employers, as it was written with the intent of allowing union representatives to participate in OSHA inspections, even in non-union workplaces.

Read More >> O.S.H.A. Stands for…the Organizing Safety And Health Administration? OSHA’s New ‘Walkaround’ Rule Provides Entry Point for Unions

The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) announced that its Contractor Portal will open to receive Affirmative Action Program (AAP) certification submissions on April 1, 2024. The deadline for contractors to certify that they are in compliance with their AAP obligations for each establishment and/or functional unit is set for July 1, 2024.

Read More >> Alert for Federal Contractors – OFCCP Contractor Portal Will Open for AAP Certification on April 1 and Agency Released Updated Annual Veteran Hiring Benchmark

On March 8, 2024, the Eastern District of Texas issued a decision striking down the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB or Board) recently-adopted rule governing the standard for joint employer status, further delaying the rule’s implementation.

Read More >> Texas Federal Court Strikes Down NLRB Joint Employer Rule

As a reminder, beginning March 12, 2024, Labor Law 201-i prohibits employers from requesting, requiring or coercing an employee or job applicant to: (i) disclose a username and password or other login information in order to access a personal account; (ii) access a personal account in the employer’s presence; or (iii) reproduce information contained within a personal account through unlawful measures. This new legislation also prohibits an employer from discharging or disciplining an employee or refusing to hire an applicant for failure to disclose such information.

The legislation is subject to certain exceptions and limitations. For example, an employer may require disclosure of information to access nonpersonal accounts that allow admission to “the employer’s internal computer or information systems.”[1] Employers may also view, access and rely on information that is publicly available.

The law also sets forth certain notice and acknowledgement requirements which employers must closely review. Specifically, under Section 5(i), an employer may obtain login information for accounts provided by the employer where the account is used for business purposes and the employee was provided prior notice of the employer’s right to inquire about such information. An employer is also permitted to access an electronic communications device which is “paid for in whole or in part by the employer where the provision of or payment for such device was conditioned on the employer’s right to access.”[2] However, the employee must have received prior notice of the condition and explicitly agreed to it. Nonetheless, the employer is prohibited from accessing any personal accounts on the device.

This law excludes law enforcement agencies, fire departments and departments of corrections and community supervision.

If you have any questions regarding the NLRB’s new rule, please contact Kali Schreiner, any attorney in Bond’s labor and employment practice or the Bond attorney with whom you are regularly in contact.

---

[1] N.Y. Lab. Law § 201-i (2)(b).

[2] Id. at § 201-i (5)(iii).

On Jan. 20, 2024, The New York City Council amended the City’s Earned Safe and Sick Time Act (ESSTA), to create a private right of action for employees claiming violations of ESSTA. The new law amends Section 20-924 of the New York City Administrative Code and allows employees to commence a civil action alleging a violation of ESSTA within two years of the date the employee knew or should have known of the alleged violation. The new law becomes effective March 20, 2024.

Currently, the sole redress for employees alleging violations of ESSTA is to submit an administrative complaint to the New York City Department of Consumer and Worker Protection (DCWP). The new amendment will allow employees to file both an administrative complaint with the DCWP and a civil action in a court of competent jurisdiction for the same alleged ESSTA violation. Employees are not required to file an administrative complaint with the DCWP prior to commencing an action in court for alleged ESSTA violations.

If an employee files both a civil suit and a DCWP complaint against the employer for the same alleged ESSTA violation, the DCWP will stay its investigation until it receives notice that the civil suit has been withdrawn or dismissed without prejudice. Once DCWP receives notice of a final judgment or settlement of the civil action, DCWP may dismiss the complaint unless it determines that the complaint alleges a violation that was not resolved by such judgment or settlement. The employee must notify DCWP within 30 days after the time for any appeal has lapsed that such complaint is withdrawn, dismissed without prejudice, or resolved by final judgment or settlement.

Employees who prove a violation of ESSTA may recover:

• Three times the wages that should have been paid pursuant to ESSTA or $250, whichever is greater, for every instance where an employee is not compensated properly by the employer for safe and sick time taken.
• $500 for every instance where an employee requested safe and sick time that was (a) wrongfully denied by the employer and not taken by the employee; (b) wrongfully conditioned upon a requirement that the employee search or find a replacement worker prior to approval; or (c) wrongfully subjected to a requirement that the employee work additional hours to make up for the original hours for which the employee was scheduled, without the mutual consent of the employer and employee.
• Full compensation for wages and benefits lost, plus $500 and equitable relief as deemed appropriate, for every instance of retaliation and interference.
• $2,500, full compensation, including wages and benefits lost; and equitable relief, including reinstatement, as deemed appropriate for each instance of unlawful discharge from employment.
• $500 for each employee covered by a policy that does not provide or allow for the use of safe and sick time pursuant to ESSTA.

In addition, the amendment permits an employee to seek injunctive relief and declaratory relief, attorney’s fees and costs, and any other relief that the court deems appropriate.

The amendment also expands ESSTA’s civil penalty provisions for entities found to be in violation of provisions regarding the accrual and use of sick or safe time or retaliation, on a per employee basis, of up to $500 to be paid to the city for the first violation. Subsequent violations that occur within two (2) years of any previous violation, entities will be liable of up to $750, not to exceed $1,000 for each succeeding violation.

If you have any questions about the information presented in this news alert, please contact Lance Willoughby-Hudson, any attorney in Bond’s labor and employment practice or the Bond attorney with whom you are regularly in contact.

A new Occupational Safety and Health Association (OSHA) rule, “Improve Tracking of Workplace Injuries and Illnesses,” recently took effect on Jan. 1, 2024. This rule requires certain high-hazard employers with 100 or more employees to electronically submit OSHA Forms 300 and 301 by March 2 of each year—starting this year. Below is a list of general questions and answers relating to the new rule.

Read More >> New Year, New OSHA Reporting Rule

On Jan. 17, 2024, the New York State Appellate Division, Second Department decided a pivotal case for employers after years of uncertainty. In Grant v. Global Aircraft Dispatch, Inc., the Second Department decided against following Vega v. CM & Associates Construction Management, LLC, a First Department decision that carried steep consequences for employers in New York for violations of New York Labor Law Section 191 (Section 191).

Read More >> Second Department Weighs in on Employees Fully Paid But Who Seek Liquidated Damages for Not Being Paid Weekly: You Can’t Get Something for Nothing

The Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC or Commission) made clear in 2023 that it intends to aggressively enforce its whistleblower protection laws, namely Rule 21F-17, which prohibits employers from taking any action that impedes an individual from communicating potential securities violations to the Commission.

Read More >> Eyes on 2024: Will the SEC Continue Its Aggressive Enforcement of Whistleblower Laws in 2024?