Duff on Hospitality Law

If you are a regular reader of Duff on Hospitality, you are well aware of the recent battle between the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), which enforces the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA), and hospitality owners and trade associations over swimming pool accessibility regulations (see previous posts here and here). With DOJ’s twice-extended deadline for compliance right around the corner on January 31, 2013, and industry-backed legislation dead in Congress committees, pool owners need to focus on compliance with DOJ’s requirements immediately, if they have not already. Mike Brunet, a partner in our Seattle office's labor and employment group and member of our Hospitality Practice Team, has prepared this post to help readers understand the requirements and nuances of the new law. Please feel free to contact Mike Brunet directly if you have any questions.

What are the DOJ requirements?

Under DOJ’s interpretation of the applicable regulations on swimming pool accessibility, owners of pools or spas open to the public must, if “readily achievable” (more on this below), provide at least one accessible means of entry to small swimming pools, which must either be a sloped entry or a pool lift. Larger swimming pools (with more than 300 linear feet of wall) must have two accessible means of entry, one of which must be a sloped entry or a pool lift. Each pool or spa on the property (with a minor exception for clustered spas) must have a separate accessible means of entry. If the means of entry is a pool lift, which is the most popular choice given its cost relative to other means of entry, it must be affixed to the pool deck or apron in some manner, and must be in place and ready for use (including charged batteries, if using a battery-powered lift) during all hours that the pool or spa is open for use.

On November 6, Washington voters passed Initiative 502 related to the decriminalization of marijuana under state law. We understand that you may have questions about how this new law affects the enforcement of your employment policies including drug free workplace and drug testing policies.

Now that the election is over and we know who’s running the country for the next few years, is it too much to think that we might get some kind of comprehensive immigration reform? It seems that the time is right for a big change. Presidents Bush and Obama were not successful in getting Congress to take action. President Obama recently instituted some controversial but popular reforms on his own without waiting for Congress. The fact that those actions may have helped him get re-elected has not gone unnoticed by Congressional representatives, who are likely to take action. But the question is when.

The federal government does not move at the speed of business. So it’s important to plan based on current law, not on what might get through Congress next year or even later. The legislative process can take months, and laws enacted won’t go into effect until even later, after regulations have been drafted and vetted. It’s important to understand your current options and the timelines associated with them while you urge Congress to fix the broken immigration system in the future.

Here are some ideas about options the hospitality industry can expect to have available for 2013. The letter and number designations in the sections below are the government’s codes for particular employment-based classifications.

TN Status:  Canadians and Mexicans in some professions can get employment authorization quickly

The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) provides options for quick (often approved on-the-spot in less than an hour), inexpensive (as little as $50 in government fees), and long-lasting employment (up to three years at a time) of citizens of Canada or Mexico. The candidate must satisfy the minimally-described educational requirements for a limited group of professions, such as accountant, computer systems analyst and hotel manager. Management consultants are also possible, but don’t call someone a consultant just because there isn’t a NAFTA profession for the service you need.

Portland’s City Council may follow San Francisco and Seattle and soon enact an ordinance that would require all employees in the city limits to earn paid sick leave. The City Council could vote on an ordinance mandating paid sick days as early as the end of the year.

Seattle’s paid sick leave ordinance only went into effect September 1st, after lengthy negotiations to revise the original ordinance to make it workable for Seattle businesses. Seattle’s ordinance requires nearly all private-sector employers to provide employees who work in Seattle with specified amounts of accrued paid sick and safe time; employers with 4 to 250 employees are required to provide one hour of sick leave for every 40 hours an employee works. San Francisco’s paid sick leave ordinance has been in effect for about 5 years. There, workers accrue an hour of sick leave for every 30 hours worked, up to 5 paid sick days per year at smaller workplaces with fewer than 10 employees and up to 9 paid sick days per year at larger workplaces. A study in San Francisco by the Institute for Women’s Policy Research found that since the enactment of San Francisco’s paid sick leave ordinance, the average worker takes 3 sick days per year. Tipped employees take an average of 2 days off and return to work sooner because their paid leave cannot make up for lost tip revenue.

Accessing Social Media Accounts

California has now joined Illinois and Maryland in banning employers from requesting social media passwords from current or potential employees or from requiring that employees log in while in the employer’s presence. Other states with pending legislation on this subject include Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina and Washington.

Because this trend is sweeping the nation, employers in any state should be careful and not request that employees divulge their social media passwords or otherwise pressure employees into granting access to social media accounts. This is good advice not only because of the legislative action, but for common sense reasons. Accessing an employee’s private social media account can lead to, among other things, the discovery of the employee’s membership in a protected class or the employee’s protected concerted activity, the employer’s knowledge of which could cause problems if the employee is later disciplined. In other words, ignorance is bliss. This is especially important to remember as the election draws near and employee use of social media to express political beliefs becomes more and more frequent.

In case there was any doubt the political season is well upon us, an increasing number of companies have been letting their employees know that if the owners had their way, everyone would vote for the candidates backed by the owner. Westgate Resorts, ASG Software Solutions and the Koch brothers of Georgia Pacific have all let their employees know that they are supporting the Republican slate, both nationally and locally. While this may be a savvy campaign strategy started by Mitt Romney in a virtual town hall meeting with the National Federation of Independent Businesses last June, the tone of the letters are seen as threatening by some. The letters have been carefully crafted to walk the thin line between a threat about the future of the company and a reflection of what the authors perceive the economic impact on business will be if the Democrats prevail. All of these letters have people wondering just how much political talk can be controlled by an employer, and just what can be said in the workplace.

The federal laws do not include political views or political affiliation in the laundry list of protected classes, but many states have taken such steps. The real risk of such public endorsement (and perceived veiled threats) in the workplace is the inherent tension and negative atmosphere that results. It is tougher to keep your employees from discussing politics (and the resulting heated discussions), if the Company president has already made a very public statement regarding his/her political views. The statements that imply the Company will close, reduce the workforce, or otherwise be impacted if the desired political party is not elected can create a lot of fear for the employees. If your employees are concerned about their jobs, you may lose some top talent. They aren’t going to want to stick around a Company that may or may not be in existence in a year. The bigger impact, though, can be on employee morale. 

Remember when Facebook was just for college kids? Well, things have changed. These days it seems like even giant companies are using social media to show their warm and fuzzy sides and to connect with customers. Obviously, the CEOs of these companies are not spending their time maintaining the accounts and posting clever comments. On the contrary, companies usually dedicate one or more employees to speak on behalf of the company, through a company-sponsored Facebook, Twitter, or other social media account. If done right, an account can build up thousands of followers and grow to host useful information, photos, or communications, becoming an important resource for customers. 

But what happens if the employee who is running a company-sponsored account quits? In a perfect world, that employee would gladly relinquish control of the account back to the company. But what if the employee leaves on bad terms? What if the employee leaves for a rival company? What if the employee changes the password and starts posting negative comments, confidential information, or trade secrets? Sorry to get all lawyer-y, but these are the questions that keep me up nights.

Some employers don’t take the Form I-9 seriously, but they should. The government has significantly increased its audits of all kinds of employers – not just the bad guys - and are assessing hefty fines for mere technical violations. This is particularly true in the hospitality industry, which can be a target for audits and which, because of employee turnover, has seen disproportionately high fines.

Every employer knows that the government’s one-page form, the “Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification,” must be completed for every new employee. And most make sure that they get theirs completed in a timely manner. But failure to be vigilant regarding the timelines or whether the forms are completed fully or correctly can cost even the best employer thousands of dollars in fines.

Most employers consider themselves good guys. They don’t purposely seek out or hire employees who are not authorized to be employed in the U.S. But those employers are mistaken if they think that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the enforcement arm of the Department of Homeland Security, only audits unscrupulous employers. ICE does focus on certain industries in which there is a history of unauthorized employment, but the reality is that ICE has become very good at conducting audits, and has a team of forensic auditors on staff that it wants to keep busy. ICE does that by initiating seemingly random individual audits or nationwide actions in which up to 1,000 audits are served in a single day, providing as little as three days’ notice before documents have to be surrendered. The writing is on the wall – employers should plan for and expect a government audit of its Form I-9 documentation.

Managing a business is hard. Managing a hospitality business is even harder. You try to have your employees understand that top notch customer service is the be all and end all of your business. They are your reputation. They are your “face.” But, there is always that one employee…

Reality shows that use mystery diners or guests to demonstrate how the bad employee can drag down the entire business may be entertaining for the public, but are nightmares for hospitality managers. It is easy to do the immediate firing when the mystery diners have the bad behavior on film, but that rarely happens in the real world. So, how do you manage the employee who is causing you endless headaches? Set expectations, respond consistently and document your efforts to change the bad behavior.

It has been a busy year thus far for public accommodations issues under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). In this week’s post, Mike Brunet, a member of our Hospitality, Travel & Tourism team, rounds up past issues, discusses a new public accommodations ruling that could affect your business, and speculates as to where public accommodations issues might go in the next year, informed by his attendance at the recent 2012 National ADA Symposium. 

March 15, 2012: ADA revisions become effective.

As detailed in a prior 2012 post, the first significant revisions to public accommodations regulations in almost 20 years became effective March 15, 2012. These revisions are far-ranging, potentially requiring changes to existing and planned features in any place of public accommodation, including hospitality properties and restaurants.

April-May, 2012:  The battle over swimming pool accessibility heats up.

Also discussed in two posts previously this year (here and here), was a battle between the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), which enforces ADA regulations, and hospitality owners and trade associations over swimming pool accessibility. DOJ interpreted the new ADA regulations to require fixed (as opposed to portable) swimming pool lifts that could not be shared between pools, while hoteliers raised safety, financial and availability reasons why the DOJ’s interpretation was incorrect. DOJ extended the date to comply with its interpretation until January 13, 2013, and legislation has been introduced in Congress to clarify what is required to comply with swimming pool access regulations.