For 2019 there are many new laws, rules and regulations that may impact your business.

Download a free labor law update the CalChamber here:

New California Laws affecting Small Business

California Laws affecting Small BusinessOver 1000 new California Laws took effect on January 1st, 2019, affecting not only our favorite Sonoma County small businesses, but California as a whole.

These new laws relate to children’s meals, concealed carry permits, wildfire legislation and more.

We encourage our community’s feedback, so please call MAJ Law at (707) 528-2882 if you have any questions about the below new 2019 laws in California.

2019 California Laws affecting Small Business

  • Assembly Bill No. 485: California pet stores are to only sell dogs, cats, and rabbits from shelters, animal control or rescue groups. Pet stores will not be allowed to purchase animals from breeders.
  • Assembly Bill No. 516: Auto dealers are to issue temporary paper license plates to newly purchased cars to ensure that all drivers pay their required tolls.
  • Assembly Bill No. 626: Mandates that it is no longer illegal to sell homemade food.
  • Assembly Bill No. 1066: Agricultural workers will be paid overtime. Within four years, workers on large farms will receive time and a half wages when working more than eight hours a day or forty hours a week.
  • Assembly Bill No. 1274: Cars eight years old or newer will be exempted from smog checks; however, in years seven and eight, there will be a smog abatement fee of $25.
  • Assembly Bill No. 1619: Victims of sexual assault are allowed up to a decade to seek civil damages.
  • Assembly Bill No. 1884: Full-service restaurants are now prohibited from providing single-use plastic straws unless asked for one from a customer.
  • Assembly Bill No. 1976: Businesses must provide breaks and private lactations spaces other than a restroom for nursing mothers.
  • Assembly Bill No. 2103: Applicants must undergo a minimum of eight hours of training and pass a live-fire shooting test to receive a concealed carry permit.
  • Assembly Bill No. 2499: Health plans are required to spend at least 80% of each premium dollar on health care.
  • Assembly Bill No. 2989: Any person over the age of 18 or older may ride an electric scooter without a helmet on any city street up to 35 miles per hour.
  • Minimum Wage: California’s minimum wage will rise to $11 per hour for employers with 25 or fewer employees and $12 per hour for businesses staffing 26 or more employees.
  • Senate Bill No. 10: Eliminates bail for suspects awaiting trial.
  • Senate Bill No. 90: Insurers are prohibited from offering short-term health plans.
  • Senate Bill No. 179: Nonbinary Californians will be able to obtain a driver’s license or state-issued ID that includes a gender nonbinary option without providing a doctors authorization.
  • Senate Bill No. 820: Companies are forbidden from forcing employees who settle sexual harassment complaints to sign nondisclosure agreements. Victims will be able to remain confidential, but perpetrators names can no longer be withheld.
  • Senate Bill No. 826: Public companies must have at least one female director on their boards by the end of 2019.
  • Senate Bill No. 946: Vendors will be permitted to sell goods on sidewalks with a designated permit.
  • Senate Bill No. 957: White and green low emission decals will no longer grant access to carpool lanes on the freeway. Drivers must have a red decal or the required amount of passengers to be allowed in the carpool lane.
  • Senate Bill No. 969: New garage doors installed must have a battery backup that will be able to lift the door in the event of a power outage.
  • Senate Bill No. 1046: Any California citizens found guilty of driving under the influence will have to temporarily install an ignition interlock device (breathalyzer) into their call until receiving their driver’s license back.
  • Senate Bill No. 1192: All restaurants must serve water or milk as default with kids meals unless a different beverage is specifically ordered.
  • Senate Bill No. 1300: Businesses are banned from requiring victims of sexual harassment to sign releases of liability as a condition of continued employment.
  • Senate Bill No. 1343: All California employees are to receive biannual sexual harassment training.
  • Senate Bill No. 1346: California has banned all “Bump Stocks.”

 

A California Supreme Court decision recently altererd the rules related to consultant and contractor hiring. While implementation of the new interpretation is being considered, if you have or utlize contractors. Here is some basic information:

  • On April 30, 2018, the California Supreme Court issued its long-awaited opinion in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court, clarifying the standard for determining whether workers in California should be classified as employees or as independent contractors for purposes of the wage orders adopted by California’s Industrial Welfare Commission (“IWC”). In so doing, the Court held that there is a presumption that individuals are employees, and that an entity classifying an individual as an independent contractor bears the burden of establishing that such a classification is proper under the “ABC test” used in some other jurisdictions.

    Depending on the applicable statute or regulation, California has a number of different definitions for whether an individual is considered an entity’s employee. In Dynamex, the Court concluded that one of these definitions – “suffer or permit to work” – may be relied upon in evaluating whether a worker is an employee for purposes of the obligations imposed by the wage order. But the Court held that the Court of Appeal had gone too far in providing a literal interpretation of “suffer or permit to work” that would encompass virtually anyone who provided services.

    The Court held that it is the burden of the hiring entity to establish that a worker is an independent contractor who was not intended to be included within the applicable wage order’s coverage.

    To meet this burden, the hiring entity must establish each of the following three factors, commonly known as the “ABC test”:

    (A) that the worker is free from the control and direction of the hiring entity in connection with the performance of the work, both under the contract for the performance of the work and in fact; and

    (B) that the worker performs work that is outside the usual course of the hiring entity’s business; and

    (C) that the worker is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, or business of the same nature as the work performed.

    The Court concluded that the “suffer or permit to work definition is a term of art that cannot be interpreted literally in a manner that would encompass within the employee category the type of individual workers . . . who have traditionally been viewed as genuine independent contractors who are working only in their own independent business.”

    Following Dynamex, entities doing business in California that treat some workers as independent contractors will want to review their relationship under the “ABC test” to determine whether any or all such workers should be reclassified

    There are efforts to clarify and/or reverse the Dynamex decision. Here is some information on the coalition leading that effort: