This spring, the Maryland legislature enacted two significant amendments to the state’s Wage Payment and Collection Law (“WPCL”), Md. Code Lab. & Empl. § 3-501, et seq. This statute governs payments for unused leave at the end of employment. More after the break.
Contributed by Eric A. Welter.Archive for the ‘Maryland’ Category
Recent Amendments to Maryland Wage Payment and Collection Law Effective October 2010
Thursday, July 22nd, 2010New Maryland Law On Independent Contractors
Wednesday, October 7th, 2009Maryland Flexible Leave Act
Monday, October 5th, 2009In October 2008, a piece of legislation went into effect that all Maryland employees are sure to be aware of. Maryland’s Flexible Leave Act went into effect on October 1, 2008, and requires that employees be permitted to use leave for the illness of immediate family members. Under the Act, which applies to employers of 15 or more employees, employees must be given the option to use any type of accrued, paid leave available to them (sick, vacation, comp-time, PTO, etc.) when an immediate family member becomes ill. More after the break.
Maryland Amends Flexible Leave Law
Wednesday, July 1st, 2009In 2008, Maryland adopted legislation that required employers (with 15 or more employees) to allow their employees to use accrued, paid leave to care for an ill, immediate family member. The law, however, was unclear in its definitions of immediate family member, employer, employees, and leave with pay. (Our prior post on the flexible leave law is here.) More after the break regarding recent amendments that attempt to clarify these issues.
Maryland Court Reverses Verdict For Employer
Monday, February 23rd, 2009In Gasper v. Ruffin Hotel Corp. of Maryland, Inc., the Maryland Court of Special Appeals reversed the lower court’s judgment for the defendant because of improper jury instructions regarding the plaintiff’s burden of proof. A copy of the opinion is here. The case included claims for sexual harassment, retaliation, and negligent hiring and retention.
Montgomery County Transgender Discrimination Ordinance Takes Effect
Monday, September 15th, 2008According to the Washington Post, a ruling by the Court of Appeals in Maryland overturning a referendum has allowed the Montgomery County ordinance prohibiting transgender discrimination to take effect. The story is here. The Maryland Court of Appeal’s per curiam order is here. The County Council news release about the ruling is here. Our original post about the ordinance is here.
County Enacts Domestic Worker Employment Contract Bill
Thursday, July 31st, 2008New Maryland Flexible Leave Act
Friday, June 27th, 2008On May 26, 2008, Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley signed the Maryland “Flexible Leave Act” into law. Under the Act, which is effective October 1, 2008, Maryland businesses employing 15 or more employees must allow their employees to use any form of accrued leave (vacation, sick leave or compensatory time) with pay to care for a child, spouse or parent who is ill.
Update on Anti-Discrimination Law in Maryland
Tuesday, May 20th, 2008On October 1, 2007, amendments to the Maryland anti-discrimination statute (Article 49B) went into effect. The Maryland Commission on Human Relations has a new FAQ on the law here. For employment purposes, protected classifications under the law include race, color, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, age, marital status, disability and genetic information. The law opens a new era in Maryland as employment discrimination plaintiffs will now have a cause of action in state court.
New Maryland Law Restricts Payment Of Accrued Leave Upon Termination
Tuesday, May 13th, 2008The Maryland General Assembly has passed, and the Governor approved, a bill amending the Maryland Wage Payment and Collection Law to provide that employers may prohibit employees from receiving accrued leave upon termination of employment, provided that the company has a written policy to that effect and the employee receives the appropriate notice as provided in the statute. The text of the new law is here.
Note that in order for an employer to deny payment of accrued leave benefits upon termination it must have in place a written policy to that effect and it must give notice of leave benefits at the time of hiring. If the employer does not do so, the accrued leave benefits arguably should be paid upon termination as “wages” under the Maryland Wage Payment and Collection Law.
Hat tip to the Maryland Employment Law Blog.
$1 Million Jury Verdict In Sexual Harassment Case in Montgomery County, Maryland
Monday, March 3rd, 2008Unused Vacation Pay Must Be Paid To Departing Employees In Maryland
Friday, January 25th, 2008The Maryland Department of Labor has changed its position on whether unused vacation time is a “wage” under Maryland law. Under its new position, unused vacation time must be paid to departing employees regardless of the employer’s policy. This is a change from the Maryland DOL’s previous position that employee had no right to payment for accrued, unused vacation time at termination if the employer’s policy clearly denied them that right.
UPDATE 5.14.2008 — PLEASE READ THIS POST FROM MAY 13, 2008, REGARDING THE NEW LAW IN MARYLAND DEALING WITH ACCRUED LEAVE.
Protection For Transgender People Extended in Montgomery County, Maryland
Wednesday, November 14th, 2007Continuing a thread of comments today and yesterday, we note the passing of legislation in Montgomery County, Maryland, extending protection from discrimination in housing, employment, public accommodations, cable television service and taxicab service to transgender people. In a press release dated November 13, 2007, the Montgomery County Council announced the unanimous approval of a bill that will prohibit discrimination against transgender people in housing, employment, public accommodations, cable television service and taxicab service. If approved by the County Executive, the county will join “13 states, the District of Columbia and 91 other local jurisdictions [that] have enacted similar legislation that prohibits discrimination against transgender individuals.” The Washington Post noted that there was significant opposition to the bill, but that their efforts were directed at the public accommodations portion.
The controversy over the Montgomery County ordinance highlights another side to the evolving definition of “protected classes.” That is the question of how far we go in defining those who are legally protected from employment discrimination (and those who are not). If everyone falls within a protected class, then is there simply a universal wrongful discharge claim? If we go beyond immutable characteristics (such as gender or race) in defining “protected classes” — for example, the District of Columbia Human Rights Act prohibits discrimination in employment based on “personal appearance” (including manner and style of dress) – then what is the basis for choosing those who fall with a “protected class”?
Difficult questions, but ones that may be debated in the U.S. Senate when the Employment Non-Discrimination Act is considered.
