January 29, 2010 – 12:35 pm
The federal government has extended the subsidy for health insurance expenses for employees who are involuntarily separated from their jobs. The law, which was enacted in February 2009 as part of President Obama’s Recovery Act, now requires employers to pay 65% of health insurance continuation costs for employees they terminate prior to February 28, 2010. It provides up to 15 months worth of this benefit, an expansion of the 9 months provided by the bill in early 2009.
The bill still is aimed solely at helping workers and does not require employers to foot any additional health insurance expense. Though businesses may initially lay out the 65% subsidy, they quickly recoup it via a credit against their payroll tax filings. The original statute provided the health insurance subsidy only to workers who were fired prior to December 31, 2009. Information on the law, which is administered by the U.S. Department of Labor, is available at http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/cobra.html.
November 9, 2009 – 9:28 am
A tough new data protection law is on the books and will soon require virtually all Massachusetts businesses to implement comprehensive policies to protect against identity theft. The statute applies so broadly that employers of every size and shape will be subject to it. All must create, implement, monitor and regularly update internal data protection procedures and encrypt information that is either transmitted via the internet or stored on portable devices.
Though the data security law became effective in October 2007, enforcement has been delayed until March 1, 2010 to permit Massachusetts companies time to become compliant. Doing so is a daunting task, since the statute’s broad reach captures virtually every every piece of what’s called “personal information.” That phrase refers to a combination of an individual’s name and either a social security number, driver’s license number, or financial account/credit card number or password. Employers must be certain to protect against both external data thefts and internal breaches. Not surprisingly, the latter sort is far more common. Read More »
October 19, 2009 – 6:36 am
In a ruling that may be useful to Massachusetts employers, the Supreme Judicial Court in October made clear that puntive damages can only be awarded to discrimination plaintiffs when their employer’s conduct is “outrageous or egregious.” Punitive damages are, after all, available only to punish bad actors, not to permit windfall awards to discrimination victims who are generally entitled only to recover what they lost in wages and what they suffered from proven emotional injuries.
Apparently recognizing the subjective natures of the terms “outrageous” and “egregious” — who, after all can define either with more than a modicum of confidence — the court did what it often does. It created a list of factors that should be considered by judges and juries when evaluating whether to issue punitive damage awards. As always, the list is intended as a guideline only. Other factors that are relevant in particular cases can always be considered. The five punitive damages factors created by the SJC are: Read More »
