Monthly Archives: December 2020

FFCRA LEAVE TO EXPIRE

By: Sally A. Piefer

December 22, 2020

Last evening the legislature approved a new COVID-19 stimulus/relief bill. The bill is expected to be signed by the President soon.

Many employers have wondered whether the legislature would extend FFCRA leave, specifically the emergency paid sick leave (EPSL) and emergency family and medical leave (EFMLA) provisions as the new year approaches and as COVID-19 cases continue to rise through much of the United States.

As you will recall, the leave provisions of the FFCRA covered all employers with fewer than 500 employees, and provided two buckets of leave:

  • EFMLA which provided paid leave for employees who are unable to work (or telework) because they need leave to care for a child (under age 18) if the child’s elementary or secondary school or place of care has been closed or if the child care provider is unavailable because of a public health emergency.
  • Emergency Paid Sick Leave provided limited paid sick leave to employees who are unable to work (or telework) because of leave needed for any of the following reasons:
        1. The employee is subject to a quarantine or isolation related to COVID-19;
        2. The employee has been advised by a health care provider to self-quarantine due to COVID-19;
        3. The employee is experiencing symptoms of COVID-19 and is seeking a medical diagnosis;
        4. The employee is caring for an individual subject to a state, federal or local quarantine or isolation related to COVID-19;
        5. The employee is caring for their child if the child’s school or place of care has been closed, or the child care provider is unavailable due to COVID-19 precautions; or
        6. The employee is experiencing any other substantially similar conditions specified by the Secretary of HHS in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary of Labor.

To benefit employers, the FFCRA provided a refundable tax credit equal to 100% of the qualified sick leave wages paid by the employer – subject to the FFCRA’s maximum payments.

Tax Credits Provided for Voluntary Extension of Leave

Although the legislature did not officially extend the leave provisions – meaning the mandatory leave expires on December 31, 2020, employers covered by the FFCRA can voluntarily continue to provide the leave through March 31, 2021 and continue to receive the tax credit. The extension of the tax credit only applies to private employers – no provisions have extended the tax credit to public employers.

The extension of the tax credit also does not mean that an employee who already exhausted their EPSL will get another bank of EPSL. However, as drafted, it would appear that if an employer’s FMLA would restart before March 31, 2021, that employer would have to provide another new bank of EFMLA through March 31, 2021. Hopefully the DOL will soon issue guidance on how the new legislation affects EFMLA.

Employer Next Steps

Employers covered by the FFCRA will need to decide whether they will continue to provide EPSL and EFMLA through March 31, 2021. If you do decide to do so, it would make sense to let your employees know about the leave, and that the extension of leave will expire on March 31, 2021.

We will continue to monitor and provide further updates on COVID-19 developments. If you have questions, please contact Sally Piefer at 414-226-4818 or spiefer@lindner-marsack.com, or contact your regular Lindner & Marsack attorney.

 

The EEOC Releases Updated Guidance on Mandatory COVID-19 Vaccinations and Related Employment Laws

By: Oyvind Wistrom

On December 16, 2020, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) released updated guidance on the responsibilities and rights of employers and employees related to the COVID-19 vaccine, including mandatory employer vaccination programs.

The publication entitled “What You Should Know About COVID-19 and the ADA, the Rehabilitation Act, and Other EEO Laws,” is available here.  The new EEOC guidance provides information to employers and employees about how mandatory COVID-19 vaccinations interact with the legal requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA).

The EEOC guidance confirms that employers are allowed to implement and enforce a mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policy for employees, with certain exceptions and caveats.  Some of the key takeaways from the EEOC include the following:

  • Employers are allowed to require employees to receive an FDA approved COVID-19 vaccine (once it becomes available) as a condition of employment or continued employment.
  • Employers must attempt to accommodate employees who, due to a medical disability under the ADA or sincerely-held religious beliefs under Title VII, decline or refuse to receive the vaccine.
  • If an employer determines, based on objective evidence, that the presence of an unvaccinated employee (i.e., employee who declines or refuses to be vaccinated because of a disability or sincerely-held religious reasons), presents a direct threat to the health and safety of other persons in the workplace that cannot be reduced or eliminated through a reasonable accommodation, the employer can exclude the employee from the workplace.
  • When an employer seeks to exclude an unvaccinated employee from the workplace due to a direct threat presented by his or her presence in the workplace, the employer may not automatically terminate the employee. Rather, the employer must attempt to accommodate the employee if he or she cannot receive the vaccine due to a disability or a sincerely held religious belief. Employers must assess four factors in making this determination: 1) the duration of the risk presented by the unvaccinated employee; 2) the nature and severity of the potential harm presented by the unvaccinated employee’s presence in the workplace; 3) the likelihood that harm will occur; and 4) how imminent that harm is to others in the workplace.
  • In determining whether a reasonable accommodation exists under the ADA, the employer should consider the feasibility of possible reasonable accommodations such as working remotely, transferring the employee to another worksite where he or she can work independently, or possibly placing the employee on a leave of absence. In so doing, the employer should consider the employee’s leave rights under the FFCRA (set to expire on December 31, 2020), both state and federal FMLA, as well as under general employment policies.
  • The administration of a COVID-19 vaccine by an employer (or by a third-party with which the employer has contracted to provide vaccinations) is not a “medical examination” under the ADA because the employer is not seeking information about the employee’s current health status. Requiring a vaccination also does not implicate the Genetic Information Non-Discrimination Act (GINA) because an employee’s genetic information is not being used to make employment decisions and no genetic information is being sought.
  • Although the administration of the vaccine is not a “medical examination” under the ADA, the guidance notes that if a health care provider asks certain pre-vaccination screening questions to ensure there is no medical reason for a person not to receive the vaccine, these questions may constitute a “medical examination” under the ADA because they may solicit information about an employee’s disability. Therefore, any pre-vaccination screening questions that are disability-related must be job-related and consistent with business necessity, and responses should be maintained as confidential.
  • Employers are also permitted to require employees to provide proof that they received a COVID-19 vaccine. Such an inquiry is not a medical examination under the ADA because it is not likely to elicit information about an employee’s disability status.  However, an employer should be careful to ensure that employees do not disclose any medical information beyond proof of the vaccination and they should avoid asking why the employee did not receive the vaccination.

With the first round of COVID-19 vaccines finally becoming available, and with several other possible vaccines on the horizon, employers need to carefully consider whether the implementation of a mandatory vaccination program is the right business decision, or whether the spread of the virus can be ameliorated through other methods or precautions.  The nature of the business, and the amount of interaction that is required between employees, customers, clients, and vendors should help guide the decision-making process of whether a mandatory vaccination program is necessary or appropriate.

If you have any questions about these guidelines or any other matter, please contact  Oyvind Wistrom or your Lindner & Marsack attorney at (414) 273-3910 to seek counsel.