Are We There Yet? California Here We Come …
Barbara J. Harris, Member of the NYSBA Labor and Employment Law Section, writes about new laws and pending proposals in New York state, which may finally surpass California for top-billing as the most pro-employee state.
January 24, 2020 at 01:02 PM
3 minute read
New Yorkers and Californians vie for accolades about almost anything (think "best bagels" vs. "best weather"). Historically, California was unrivalled as the most employee-friendly state (and therefore the most challenging for employers). But given the political divide at the federal level, there has been a proliferation of state and local lawmaking aimed at increasing workplace protections, with New York at the forefront of many recent progressive developments. So is New York poised to become the next California? Or are we already there?
In 2019, sweeping reforms to the New York Human Rights Law (NYHRL) made it one of the broadest anti-discrimination laws in the country. As amended, the law applies to all employers (effective February 2020), and now protects both independent contractors and interns against all forms of workplace discrimination and harassment (not just based on sex). New York also requires all employers, regardless of size, to conduct annual sexual harassment prevention training for all their employees. Notably, California's Fair Employment Housing Act (FEHA), even as recently amended, generally only applies to employers with five or more employees, does not generally cover independent contractors, and only requires harassment training every two years.
New York has also expanded its protected classes. In June 2019, the state amended the NYSHRL to prohibit discrimination based on protective hairstyles associated with race, such as braids and twists, following New York City's lead earlier that year. Ironically, though, California passed its CROWN Act adding hairstyle protections first, while the New York law was awaiting Governor Cuomo's signature. New York also added protections against discrimination based on employees' reproductive health care decisions, following similar actions by New York City (though California has had these protections since 2017).
Beyond harassment and discrimination, New York's minimum wage and minimum salary threshold for overtime exemptions are among the highest in the country and all exceed the federal minimums, even as increased under the DOL's 2019 Final Rule. New York has also broadened its pay equity law to require equal pay based on all protected classes (not just sex) and joined the growing number of jurisdictions (including New York City and California) that ban salary history inquiries in recruitment and compensation decisions (effective Jan. 6, 2020).
Both New York and California passed #MeToo-inspired laws imposing restrictions on confidentiality provisions in certain settlement agreements, and have attempted to restrict mandatory arbitration agreements as a condition of employment (though these laws are subject to legal challenges). And while California recently codified one of the most restrictive independent contractor classification tests (AB-5), the California development reportedly got Governor Cuomo's "competitive juices flowing," stating that he did not "want to lag California in anything …" (Crain's NY Business, Sept. 10, 2019).
California may still lay claim to some statewide protections and proscriptions that have not yet migrated east. But with pending proposals regarding unionizing rights for gig workers, non-compete restrictions, and new paid sick leave laws, New York may finally surpass California for top-billing as the most pro-employee state. Stay tuned in 2020!
Barbara Harris is senior legal editor, labor & employment service, at Practical Law.
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
© 2025 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 AllBipartisan Lawmakers to Hochul Urge Greater Student Loan Forgiveness for Public-Interest Lawyers
'Playing the Clock'?: Hochul Says NY's Discovery Loophole Is to Blame for Wide Dismissal of Criminal Cases
So Who Won? Congestion Pricing Ruling Leaves Both Sides Claiming Victory, Attorneys Seeking Clarification
4 minute readHochul Vetoes 'Grieving Families' Bill, Faulting a Lack of Changes to Suit Her Concerns
Trending Stories
- 1South Florida Attorney Charged With Aggravated Battery After Incident in Prime Rib Line
- 2'A Death Sentence for TikTok'?: Litigators and Experts Weigh Impact of Potential Ban on Creators and Data Privacy
- 3Bribery Case Against Former Lt. Gov. Brian Benjamin Is Dropped
- 4‘Extremely Disturbing’: AI Firms Face Class Action by ‘Taskers’ Exposed to Traumatic Content
- 5State Appeals Court Revives BraunHagey Lawsuit Alleging $4.2M Unlawful Wire to China
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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