Coronavirus Update 4-14-2020: Telecommuting as a reasonable accommodation

Telecommuting has become the coronavirus norm. The CDC recommends that employees who can work from home do so, and state Stay at Home orders are requiring telework whenever possible.

The larger questions, however, are whether COVID-19 will change our national outlook on the viability of telework, or when his crisis ends will businesses return to their pre-coronavirus telework hostility?

I hope it’s the former but I fear it’s the latter. And if it’s the latter, Tchankpa v. Ascena Retail Group, which the 6th Circuit decided in the midst of the growing coronavirus outbreak and just five days before the WHO declared a viral pandemic, gives us some insight into the future issues.

Coronavirus Update 4-13-2020: Trying to make sense of the substitution of employer-provided leave for EPSL and EFMLA under the FFCRA

One of the more confounding sets of rules under the FFCRA is when employers can require employees to substitute an employer’s own provided leave (which, for the sake of convenience I’ll refer to throughout as “PTO”) for paid leave —the 80 hours of paid sick leave (“EPSL”) or the 12 weeks of expanded family and medical leave (“EFMLA”)—mandated by the Families First Coronavirus Response Act.

Today I am going to make an attempt to explain these rules, but I’ll fully admit that it’s still not 100 percent clear to me. The text of the FFCRA seems to suggest that an employer can never require the substitution of PTO. The DOL’s proposed regulations, however, muddy the waters, which were muddied even further by an amendment to those proposed regulations published last Friday, which deleted language from the regulations’ explanatory discussion relating to the substitution of PTO for EFMLA.

So let’s try to sort it all out.

Coronavirus Update 4-10-2020: The top 5 things I’m doing besides working

How are you filling your non-working time? We used to fill our time running our kids all over the place for various lessons, rehearsals, and gigs. Now, however, we have a lot of down-time, with nothing to do. So how am I filling my time when I’m not working? (Which, btw, I’ve been doing a lot of over the past month.)

Coronavirus Update 4-9-2020: CDC issues new guidelines for the return of essential workers to work after a coronavirus exposure

Last night, the Center for Disease Control issued new guidelines for when an essential employer should permit a critical infrastructure employee to return to work after a coronavirus exposure (defined as a household contact or having close contact within 6 feet of an individual with confirmed or suspected coronavirus for up to 48 hours before the individual became symptomatic).

The guidelines are a substantial departure from how I’ve been advising my clients for the past month.

Coronavirus Update 4-8-2020: Employers, if you are requiring your employees to wait in line for a coronavirus fever check, please pay them for waiting

Bloomberg Law asks whether employers are “responsible for paying workers for the time it takes to record their body temperatures before entering the workplace.” To me, this question doesn’t require a legal analysis but a common-sense application of basic decency. If your employees are queuing before entering work because you are requiring them to pass a temperature check, pay them … period.

Since this is a legal blog, however, I might as well look beyond common sense and examine the laws impacted by this issue—the ADA and the FLSA.

Coronavirus Update 4-7-2020 number 2: FFCRA loopholes (and another Zoominar)

Senator Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) have sent a scathing letter to Secretary of Labor Eugene Scalia calling out the DOL for contradictions they see between the text of the Families First Coronavirus Response Act and the agency’s interpretive guidance.

Among the issues that they red-flagged:

Coronavirus Update 4-7-2020: What does OSHA have to say about coronavirus for employers?

OSHA, the federal agency responsible for health and safety, has been all over the coronavirus pandemic, providing a wealth of resources for employers. 

That said, OSHA does not have a specific standard addressing viral pandemics. Instead, it regulates this outbreak via its general duty clause: “Each employer shall furnish to each of [its] employees employment and a place of employment which are free from recognized hazards that are causing or are likely to cause death or serious physical harm to his employees.”

So what steps should employers take to furnish employees a workplace safe from coronavirus—a hazard that is causing or is likely to cause death or serious physical harm?