Once shelter in place is lifted, the $600 unemployment bonus is no longer in effect: Under the temporary regulations, an employee who is subject to a federal, state, or local quarantine or isolation order related to COVID-19 qualifies for the CARES Act $600 weekly bonus.  Once the shelter-in-place order is lifted, employees who stay at home and have no other reason to do so, will not qualify for the $600 weekly bonus.  Employers will need to send employees who are not working and sheltering at home a recall notice providing the time and date for return to work and a description of all mitigation measures being taken.  If an employee still refuses to return to work, the employer can protest in MiWAM.  Employers should discuss legal issues related to restarting operations and recall with their legal counsel.

A legitimate recall notice and no return does not impact PPP Loans: A new SBA FAQ helps employers when employees refuse to return to work when on UIA:

The key points to note are the requirement for the employer to issue a written offer to rehire the employee and that the employer must document the rejection of the offer. 

COVID-19 temporary policy for List B identity documents:  Because many areas are under stay-at-home orders due to COVID-19 and some online renewal services have restrictions, employees may experience challenges renewing a state driver’s license, a state ID card, or other Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification, List B identity documents. Considering these circumstances, DHS is issuing a temporary policy regarding expired List B identity documents used to complete Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification.  Beginning on May 1, identity documents found in List B set to expire on or after March 1, 2020, and not otherwise extended by the issuing authority, may be treated the same as if the employee presented a valid receipt for an acceptable document for Form I-9 purposes.   When the employee provides an acceptable expired List B document that has not been extended by the issuing authority you should:  record the document information in Section 2 under List B, as applicable; and enter the word “COVID-19” in the Additional Information Field.   Within 90 days after DHS’s termination of this temporary policy, the employee will be required to present a valid unexpired document to replace the expired document presented when they were initially hired. Source:  USCIS 5/4/20

USCIS issues revised M-274, Handbook for Employers: USCIS released a revised M-274, Handbook for Employers: Guidance for Completing Form I-9,  with expanded information on properly completing Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification. Revisions include updates based on the recent Form I-9 release, as well as policy changes and clarifications. To learn more, please see the summary of changes on I-9 Central.

Who is quitting the workforce at a higher rate?  Women: According to a surveyconducted by Syndio, 14% of women are considering quitting their jobs because of the family demands created by the Coronavirus crisis.  11% of men told the pay-equity software company that they have considered doing the same. Another 10% of men reported that their partner or spouse is considering quitting, while 6% of women had the same answer. Breaking down the data by race, 26% of Hispanic women who responded to the survey said they were considering quitting their jobs, compared with 15% of both black and Asian women and 12% of white women.  Women leaving the workforce under the pressures of a global crisis could have long-term consequences. The 80-cents-on-the-dollar gender pay gap increases for working mothers, and lost earnings during a limited period compound over time. Annual earnings for women who took one year out of the workforce between 2001 and 2015 were 39% lower than earnings for women who worked straight through those 15 years, according to a 2018 IWPR report.  Source:  Fortune  4/23/20 

Rightsizing and new hires - DOJ is watching:  On April 13, 2020, the Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division and the Federal Trade Commission’s Bureau of Competition released a joint statement and press release regarding “competition in labor markets” and potential agency actions in the face of the COVID-19 crisis. While the agencies’ joint statement appears to be focused on collusion between employers entering into horizontal “no-hire” or “no-poach” agreements, employers in certain industries affected by the crisis should also exercise reasonable care in enforcing vertical restrictive covenants, including non-competition and non-solicitation agreements.  The agencies’ recently issued joint statement seems to mostly reiterate what the DOJ had already identified as an enforcement priority, while reminding employers in certain industries—specifically, those who employ medical providers, first responders, and other essential service providers—that they may be subject to enhanced scrutiny.  Source:  Seyfarth Shaw 4/27/20

Pregnancy discrimination comparators is almost everyone: The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Durham v. Rural/Metro Corp., No. 18-14687  (11^th Circuit Court of Appeals, 4/17/2020), considered the following: who is deemed a valid comparator to a pregnant employee as part of the prima facie case under the McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting framework as modified by the Supreme Court in Young v. United Parcel Serv., Inc., 575 U.S. 206 (2015), for cases involving the Pregnancy Discrimination Act of 1978 (“PDA”). The answer is anyone, whether injured on or off the job, who cannot perform their job without an accommodation because of a restriction like that of the pregnant worker.  Therefore, in these cases, HR needs to consider if certain accommodations (including but not limited to temporary light-duty assignments) are limited to those with on-the-job injuries, why that is the case, and ensure there is more than a monetary or convenience reason for treating those with on-the-job injuries differently from pregnant workers with similar work restrictions.  Source:  Seyfarth Shaw 4/30/20