New COVID-19 Laws: A Summary for Employers and Employees
Congress has passed and President Donald Trump has signed into law the Families First Coronavirus Response Act.
March 25, 2020 at 12:45 PM
5 minute read
Congress has passed and President Donald Trump has signed into law the Families First Coronavirus Response Act.
The act impacts employers and employees in two major ways: it amends the Family Medical Leave Act to provide for certain paid leave and enacts the Emergency Paid Sick Leave Act, which provides for paid sick leave in specified situations.
Here are some of the highlights of both provisions.
|Emergency Paid Sick Leave Act
This law requires private employers who employ fewer than 500 employees (and government employers) to provide paid sick time to employees to the extent that the employee is unable to work (or telework) because:
- The employee is subject to a federal, state or local quarantine or isolation order related to COVID-19.
- The employee has been advised by a health care provider to self-quarantine due to concerns related to COVID-19.
- The employee is experiencing symptoms of COVID-19 and is seeking a medical diagnosis.
- The employee is caring for an individual who is subject to a quarantine or isolation order or has been advised by a health care provider to self-quarantine.
- The employee is caring for a son or daughter because the child's school or place of care has been closed or the child's childcare is unavailable due to COVID-19 precautions.
- The employee is experiencing any other substantially similar condition specified by the Secretary of the HHS in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary of Labor.
Employers of health care providers or emergency responders may elect not to provide this leave to those employees.
All employees, regardless of length of employment, are entitled to paid sick time, assuming they meet the above criteria. Full-time employees are entitled to 80 hours of paid sick leave. Part-time employees are entitled to sick leave equal to the average number of hours the employee works over a two-week period.
If time off is taken for self-care (which are categories 1, 2 and 3 above), employees must be compensated at the higher of the employee's regular rate of pay, federal minimum wage, or the local minimum wage. If time off is taken to care for a sick family member or a child who is not in school, employees must be compensated at two-thirds of their regular rate of pay.
There is a cap. The cap depends on whether the employee is receiving full wages or two-thirds wages. For full wages, it's $511 per day and an aggregate limit of $5,110. For two-thirds wages, the cap is $200 per day, with $2,000 aggregate.
|Emergency Family and Medical Leave Expansion Act
The Families First Coronavirus Response Act also contains the Emergency Family and Medical Leave Expansion Act. This act expands the protections of the FMLA, providing for leave due to a public health emergency qualifying need (i.e., coronavirus). The act applies to all employers with fewer than 500 employees.
Emergency FMLA leave is available if an employee has been employed at least 30 calendar days and is unable to work (or telework) due to a need for leave to care for the employee's son or daughter who is under 18 because the child's school or place of care has been closed or his or her childcare provider is unavailable due to a public health emergency.
The act provides for both unpaid and paid leave. The first 10 days of leave may be unpaid. An employee may elect (or an employer may require an employee) to substitute any accrued vacation, personal leave, or medical or sick leave for unpaid leave.
After 10 days, employers must provide partial paid leave for each additional day of leave at an amount that is not less than two-thirds of an employee's regular rate of pay for the number of hours the employee would otherwise be scheduled to work. For employees who have weekly working hours that fluctuate, the employer is allowed to take an average over a six-month period.
There are also caps. Paid leave may not exceed $200 per day and $10,000 in the aggregate.
For employers with 25 or more employees, the FMLA's standard job restoration requirements will apply too. For employers with less than 25 employees, job restoration is not required if all the following conditions are met:
- The employee takes leave;
- The position held by the employee does not exist due to economic conditions or other changes in operating conditions that affect employment and are caused by a public health emergency during the period of leave;
- The employer makes reasonable efforts to restore the employee to an equivalent position
If no equivalent positions are available at the time that the employee tries to return from leave, the employer must attempt to contact the employee if an equivalent position becomes available in the next year.
Certain employers may be exempt by being granted an exemption from The Secretary of Labor in circumstances where the leave requirement would jeopardize the business as an ongoing concern.
The above is a summary of both laws. There are certain exemptions as well as provisions regarding tax credits. Employers and employees should consult counsel to get a complete understanding of both laws. Stay safe everyone.
Michael Elkins is an 18-year litigation attorney and the founder of MLE Law, a full-service labor and employment/business law firm in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. He is also the host of the Game 7 podcast. For more information, visit www.mlelawfirm.com.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllData Breaches, Increased Regulatory Risk and Florida’s New Digital Bill of Rights
7 minute readNavigating Florida's Products Liability Law: Defective Products, Warnings and the Pursuit of Justice
6 minute readNavigating Florida Property Insurance Claims in a Post-Fee-Shifting World
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250