![](http://images.law.com/contrib/content/uploads/sites/389/2021/08/Pappas_Nicholas_12342_HS-CLR-767x633.jpg)
Recent Employment Law Developments in California
In his Employment Law column, Nicholas J. Pappas discusses several statutes enacted by the California legislature in the past couple of years that employers should consider if they wish to comply with California law and avoid unexpected and often expensive employment law claims.
August 03, 2021 at 12:45 PM
9 minute read
With a robust economy and deep pool of talent and human capital, California continues to attract business from around the world. Employers undoubtedly benefit greatly from having operations in the Golden State, but also must grapple with an ever-changing web of rules and regulations applicable to their employment relationships. In this month's column, we discuss several statutes enacted by the California legislature in the past couple of years that employers should consider if they wish to comply with California law and avoid unexpected and often expensive employment law claims.
Infection Prevention Requirements
Effective Jan. 1, 2021, AB 685 added California Labor Code §6409.6 which requires employers to notify employees of potential COVID-19 exposures in the workplace. If an employer or its representative receives notice of "potential exposure to COVID-19," then within one business day the employer must provide written notice to all employees (and employers of subcontracted employees) who were present at the same worksite as the individual reported to the employer as having had COVID-19 (as determined by a laboratory test, licensed health care provider, or public health official) during the infectious period. Section 6409.6 defers to the California Department of Public Health's (CDPH) definition of "infectious period," which begins for symptomatic individuals two days prior to the development of symptoms and ends when all of the following conditions have been met: (1) 10 days have elapsed since symptoms first appeared, (2) 24 hours have passed with no fever and no use of fever reducing medications, and (3) other symptoms have improved. For asymptomatic individuals who test positive, the infectious period begins two days prior to, and ends 10 days after, the employee provided the test specimen. Employer Guidance on AB 685 Definitions, Cal. Dep't of Pub. Health (Oct. 16, 2020). Employers must provide notice written in a language understood by the majority of employees and in a manner the employer normally communicates employment-related information, such as email, personal service, or text message. The notice must inform employees of their potential exposure to COVID-19 and any disinfection or safety plan the employer plans to implement per the guidelines of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention as well as provide information regarding COVID-19-related benefits to which the employee may be entitled under federal, state, or local laws, including but not limited to, workers' compensation, leave set forth by statute, leave provided to employees pursuant to the employer's policies or practices, as well as anti-retaliation and anti-discrimination protections of the employee.
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 All!['Serious Legal Errors'?: Rival League May Appeal Following Dismissal of Soccer Antitrust Case 'Serious Legal Errors'?: Rival League May Appeal Following Dismissal of Soccer Antitrust Case](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/6d/c4/9fef7ed94ec2ab661f4098d24490/hector-gonzalez-2022-002-767x633.jpg)
'Serious Legal Errors'?: Rival League May Appeal Following Dismissal of Soccer Antitrust Case
6 minute read![How Some Elite Law Firms Are Growing Equity Partner Ranks Faster Than Others How Some Elite Law Firms Are Growing Equity Partner Ranks Faster Than Others](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/08/74/d52420804282a7dfc379a3c57b89/human-resources-767x633-10.jpg)
How Some Elite Law Firms Are Growing Equity Partner Ranks Faster Than Others
4 minute read![The Lawyers Waging the Legal Fight Against the Trump Administration The Lawyers Waging the Legal Fight Against the Trump Administration](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/4e/db/1bd26a0247e8afb36d78c52e415a/donald-trump-executive-orders-767x633.jpg)
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Thursday Newspaper
- 2Public Notices/Calendars
- 3Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-117
- 4Rejuvenation of a Sharp Employer Non-Compete Tool: Delaware Supreme Court Reinvigorates the Employee Choice Doctrine
- 5Mastering Litigation in New York’s Commercial Division Part V, Leave It to the Experts: Expert Discovery in the New York Commercial Division
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