SEXUAL HARASSMENT TRAINING IS NOW BEING OFFERED BY PRATT & ASSOCIATES

California’s Harassment Training and Education Law — more commonly called Assembly Bill 1825 Regulations or simply AB 1825 — mandates that employers with more than 50 employees provide training in sexual-harassment prevention to supervisors every two years. Also, new hires into management and those promoted into management must be trained within 6 months of hire or promotion.

Pratt & Associates will come to your office to present the legally mandated two-hour training to supervisors and managers for as low as $70 per supervisor or manager (minimum of 10 attendees, travel outside of San Jose area is extra).

Contact attorney Susan E. Bishop about setting up a training in your office.

Susan E. Bishop graduated from the Santa Clara University School of Law in 1996. She specializes in the representation of management in employment law matters. Her practice includes working with nonprofit and for-profit corporations on many issues, including incorporation, employee relations, personnel policies, wage and hour matters, discrimination, harassment and wrongful termination.

To lean more about Susan’s specialties of law, please view her profile under attorneys. If you would like to speak with Susan, please call 408-369-0800.

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR: MORTGAGE LOAN OFFICERS ARE NOT EXEMPT UNDER FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT

On March 24, 2010, the Wage and Hour Division of the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) announced that mortgage loan officers do not qualify as bona fide administrative employees under section 13(a)(1) of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The DOL rejected its earlier position that found loan officers to be exempt administrative employees.

The DOL concluded that mortgage loan officers are primarily responsible for making sales for their employers, not performing office or nonmanual work directly related to the management or general business operations of their employer. “Work such as collecting financial information from customers, entering it into the computer program to determine what particular loan products might be available to that customer, and explaining the terms of the available options and the pros and cons of each option, so that a sale can be made, constitutes the production work of an employer engaged in selling or brokering mortgage loan products,” the Administrator wrote. “Such duties do not relate to the internal management or general business operations of the company; they do not involve servicing the business itself by providing advice regarding internal operations, unlike the duties of employees working in, for example, a firm’s human resources department, accounting department, or research department.” Thus, these employees do not satisfy the second prong of the test for administrative exemption.

The Administrator also considered that mortgage loan officers are typically paid by commissions, are trained by their employers and are evaluated in large part on the basis of their sales volume.

If you are interested in learning how this new interpretation may impact your California business, please contact attorney Susan E. Bishop at (408) 369-0800 or sbishop@prattattorneys.com

Susan E. Bishop graduated from the Santa Clara University School of Law in 1996. She specializes in the representation of management in employment law matters. Her practice includes working with nonprofit and for-profit corporations on many issues, including incorporation, employee relations, personnel policies, wage and hour matters, discrimination, harassment and wrongful termination.

To lean more about Susan’s specialties of law, please view her profile under attorneys. If you would like to speak with Susan, please call 408-369-0800.

March 2010

Susan Bishop was recently quoted in an article for CNNMoney.com regarding independent contractors versus employees and the audits and penalties that come with the misclassification of workers. Read the full article at http://bit.ly/ajqqr1.

Rosalia Tapia recently settled a hotly contested wage and hour case on terms very favorable to her employer client, a large food manufacturing company in California. Attorney Tapia’s aggressive defense of the matter was key in arriving at a nominal settlement amount, substantially below plaintiff’s original demand at the mediation.

A nuisance lawsuit filed by Sharon Glenn Pratt recently forced the removal of a giant tree from land adjoining her client’s property in Santa Cruz County. The tree had been threatening her client’s Ben Lomond home after being damaged in severe weather. A fallen limb from the tree had caused extensive property damage, yet the owners of the tree had ignored all requests to remove it. The client’s homeowners insurance policy was threatening non-renewal if the tree was not removed, and the clients were fearful for their own safety as well.

Sharon Glenn Pratt achieved two substantial settlements in March for her condominium association client, for past due assessments which had previously remained unpaid for years. Pratt & Associates collected by filing lawsuits against the non-paying owners personally, and pursuing default judgments, rather than placing liens on the devalued properties. The condominium association received payment in full for all of the past due amounts, plus the collection costs and attorney fees.