<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Business &#38; Employment Law Blog &#187; Uncategorized</title>
	<atom:link href="http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/category/uncategorized/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com</link>
	<description>Northern California&#039;s Source for Business and Employment News</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 31 Oct 2011 17:17:49 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>How to Run a Productive Work Meeting (Guest Post)</title>
		<link>http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2010/10/how-to-run-a-productive-work-meeting-guest-post/</link>
		<comments>http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2010/10/how-to-run-a-productive-work-meeting-guest-post/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Oct 2010 19:09:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Shawn McCammon</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[business best practices]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business start up]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[meetings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[planning]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/?p=223</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here is a guest post by Joseph Gustav, a blogger for Pounding the Pavement and a writer on High School Diploma at Home for Guide to Career Education. Joseph provides some good points to ponder when convening a meeting at your workplace:
Meetings are an evil necessity. Workers must take time from their busy days for [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here is a guest post by <em>Joseph Gustav, a </em><em>blogger for <a href="http://www.guidetocareereducation.com/blog" target="_blank">Pounding the Pavement</a> and a writer on <a href="http://www.guidetocareereducation.com/high-school-diploma" target="_blank">High School Diploma at Home</a> for Guide to Career Education. </em>Joseph provides some good points to ponder when convening a meeting at your workplace:</p>
<p>Meetings are an evil necessity. Workers must take time from their busy days for sessions that are all too often unproductive and unengaging. Meetings are supposed to be extremely valuable opportunities to work as a team at a designated time and place but all too often are unorganized nuisances. Here are some tips to run effective business meetings that will boost productivity rather than take away from time that could have been spent more productively.</p>
<p><strong>Plan, plan, and plan ahead of time. </strong>This goes for everybody. Supervisors or team leaders should have a set agenda working toward a predetermined goal. Meetings should be rigidly structured and time should be allotted for specific points of discussion. The more advance notice, the better &#8212; have an agenda prepared the day before so team members can prepare as well, and the expectation should be made clear that they should attend well prepared for the topics at hand.</p>
<p><strong>Stick to a schedule. </strong>Start meetings on time and end on time, if not early. Certainly try hard not to run over on time because that is the easiest way to have team members start watching the clock and stop paying attention and contributing to discussion. This is tied to the planning aspect: make sure your expectations for what will be covered in the time allotted are realistic. Also, do not schedule meetings for incovenient times such as the end of the day. Mid-morning right before lunch is a good time, but try to ask team members for what works best for the majority.</p>
<p><strong>Do not stray off topic.</strong> Your agenda should be followed, so do not allow anything not on that agenda to enter into discussion unless absolutely relevant and necessary. Staying on topic will make for meetings that are more efficient, productive, and useful, and that are well worth your team members&#8217; time and yours. Get down to business and dig in to the topics at hand, and nothing more.</p>
<p><strong>Do not hold unnecessary meetings. </strong>If there really is nothing new to talk about, you do not have to hold a meeting for the sake of having one. It&#8217;s a waste of time and only reinforces that meetings are pointless and unproductive. If an e-mail works just as well, send one out; face time is not always essential.</p>
<p><strong>Write it down. </strong>Have a white board or something large to write on to put down new goals and ideas. Having something in writing motivates people to recognize that what was discussed in the meeting will happen, and that it needs to happen. Also, have someone keep minutes and send it out to all team members post-meeting. Recapping is always welcomed by team members to remember what was discussed and decided and serves to underscore the ideas presented and goals made while together.</p>
<p><strong>Decide on what&#8217;s next. </strong>Be sure to have new goals and steps to take to reach these objectives decided at the meeting&#8217;s conclusion. Assign tasks to be undertaken and deadlines for them to be completed. If possible, detail a vague idea of what the next meeting will entail so everyone knows what to work toward &#8212; again, there can never be too much planning. This ensures that meetings stay productive and are viewed as such because actual actions will be expected to be taken after everyone has gone back to work.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2010/10/how-to-run-a-productive-work-meeting-guest-post/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Harassment Prevention Training Should Be Considered By All Employers</title>
		<link>http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2010/08/harassment-prevention-training-should-be-considered-by-all-employers/</link>
		<comments>http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2010/08/harassment-prevention-training-should-be-considered-by-all-employers/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Aug 2010 16:30:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Shawn McCammon</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Employers Vicarious Liability for Acts of Employees]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Employment Advice & Counseling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Employment Legislation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AB1825]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[california employement law attorney wage and hour redding red bluff chico]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[compliance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EEOC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employment law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[harassment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[training]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/?p=220</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Recently, the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) announced that Trinity Products, Inc (“Trinity”), a billboards and signposts manufacturer, agreed to pay $55,000 to settle a sexual harassment and retaliation suit filed by the EEOC. The EEOC alleged that a “high level manager harassed his assistant with offensive language and gestures and requests for sexual [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: justify;">Recently, the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) announced that Trinity Products, Inc (“Trinity”), a billboards and signposts manufacturer, agreed to pay $55,000 to settle a sexual harassment and retaliation suit filed by the EEOC. The EEOC alleged that a “high level manager harassed his assistant with offensive language and gestures and requests for sexual favors and sought to replace her after she complained to other supervisors about his conduct, resulting in her discharge.” (EEOC, et al. v. Trinity Products, Inc., et al., Case No. 4:09-CV-01617 CAS). As part of the settlement, Trinity must distribute a notice informing employees of their rights under federal anti-discrimination laws and provide sexual harassment training for all managers.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">The above case is a reminder that the “language” used by one employee can easily be considered “offensive” and sexual harassing by another employee. An employee’s stray comment, sexual inference or joke is often considered sexual harassment by a co-worker. Interestingly, the improper comments are often made by those employees in a supervisory, management or senior executive position.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">To reduce company liability and prevent harassment allegations, claims and lawsuits, many companies conduct sexual harassment prevention training on an annual basis. Employees should be provided with the legal definition of sexual harassment, given examples of sexual harassment based on common work-day interactions, provided the company’s reporting procedures and encouraged to report all incidents without fear of retaliation.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Creating a culture where employees are empowered to report sexual harassment often starts with a well drafted employee handbook that clearly defines the company’s reporting procedures. To prevent sexual harassment, we recommend that all employers review their handbook policies for clarity and consider sexual harassment prevention training on an annual basis. Indeed, this training is a requirement for employers with more than 50 employees, which includes contractors and part-time employees.  Additionally, the training should be considered by smaller employers to bolster their defenses in the event of similar litigation.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Liberty Law provides economical harassment prevention training that complies with the law, adding to the employer&#8217;s defense in the event of litigation. Additionally, Liberty Law will provide this training and seminar free of charge to its level 2 and 3 monthly subscribers (<a href="http://www.northstategeneralcounsel.com/counsel-services.html">more details here</a>) after 6 months of engagement.</p>
<a href='http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2010/08/harassment-prevention-training-should-be-considered-by-all-employers/' class='retweet vert' startCount = '0'>Harassment Prevention Training Should Be Considered By All Employers</a>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2010/08/harassment-prevention-training-should-be-considered-by-all-employers/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>California Court Decision Restricts Union Activity on Private Property</title>
		<link>http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2010/08/california-court-decision-restricts-union-activity-on-private-property/</link>
		<comments>http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2010/08/california-court-decision-restricts-union-activity-on-private-property/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Aug 2010 16:30:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Shawn McCammon</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business Protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business and Entrepreneur]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Employmnet Advice & Counseling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[small business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[activity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[constitutional]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employees]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Employer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[labor code.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Moscone Act]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[private property]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[soliciting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[union]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/?p=215</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A recent decision by the California Court of Appeal has basically banned unions from picketing on business property within California. In its opinion the court invalidated two California laws designed to protect union demonstrations on business property.  The reviewing court ordered the trial court to grant an injunction restraining the United Food and Commercial Workers [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: justify;">A recent decision by the California Court of Appeal has basically banned unions from picketing on business property within California. In its opinion the court invalidated two California laws designed to protect union demonstrations on business property.  The reviewing court ordered the trial court to grant an injunction restraining the United Food and Commercial Workers Union (“the Union”) from picketing in front of a Sacramento warehouse store owned by Ralphs Grocery Co. (“Ralphs”). <em>Ralphs Grocery Co. v. United Food and Commercial Workers Local 8,</em><em> </em>No. C060413 (Cal. Ct. App. July 19, 2010).</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong><em>Facts: </em></strong>The dispute arose when several members of the Union picketed in front of Food Co., a subsidiary of Ralphs, for being a nonunion store. Ralphs sued for trespass and sought to enjoin the unauthorized picketing after an unsuccessful attempt to require the Union to follow Food Co.’s rules for speech on the property. The rules prohibited, in part, the distribution of literature, physical contact with any person, display of signs larger than two feet by three feet, and speech within 20 feet of the store entrance. Ralphs alleged that the Union didn&#8217;t follow the rules ; specifically, that the Union  was handing out flyers and enlisting supporters within five feet of the entrance.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">In bringing suit, Ralphs challenged the constitutionality of California’s Moscone Act, which deprived state courts of jurisdiction to issue injunctions against “peaceful picketing or patrolling” involving any labor dispute. Ralph’s lawsuit also challenged California’s Labor Code section 1131.8, which imposed severe restrictions on a property owner’s right to obtain injunctive relief against union activities. The trial court ruled that the Moscone Act was unconstitutional because it constituted content based discrimination in violation of the First Amendment and Equal Protection Clause. The trial court, however, upheld the constitutionality of California’s Labor Code section 1138.1 in light of a prior appellate decision which held that Labor Code section 1138.1 did not violate federal and state constitutional guarantees of equal protection. Applying Labor Code section 1138.1, the trial court denied Ralphs’ motion for a preliminary injunction. Ralphs appealed.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong><em>Decision: </em></strong>Three questions of law were at issue on appeal:</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">1) Is the entrance area of Food Co., where the picketing was taking place, a public or private forum? If public, the California Constitution required that any time, place, and manner restrictions on free speech be reasonable. The court found that Food Co.’s entrance area was not a public forum, so the company was free to restrict the type of speech allowed at its entrance.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">2) Is California&#8217;s Moscone Act, which limited the ability of courts to issue injunctions in labor relations cases, constitutional? The constitutionality of the Moscone Act was at issue because the Act&#8217;s selective restriction was based on the content of the speech. The court held that the Moscone Act was unconstitutional under the First and Fourteenth Amendments because it afforded preferential treatment to speech concerning labor disputes over speech about other issues.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">3) Is the requirement of California’s Labor Code section 1138.1 that factual showings be made before a court is able to grant an injunction in a labor dispute constitutional (<em>i.e</em>., that unlawful acts have been threatened and will be committed and that substantial and irreparable injury to the property would result)? The court found that this Labor Code section was unconstitutional for the same reasons as that of the Moscone Act.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong><em>Stay Tuned: </em></strong>Although the decision may be subject to further appeal, this case provides important guidance for employers dealing with the issue of regulating union activity on business property. The court’s ruling is seen as a major victory for California retailers who have endured loss of business and damage to their image resulting from union picketing on their properties. A wide spectrum of businesses ranging from hospitals to retail chain stores are expected to be impacted by this decision. Employers need to have a firm grasp of what constitutes public and private forums under California law and be able to determine the types of content neutral restrictions that are enforceable on their premises.</p>
<a href='http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2010/08/california-court-decision-restricts-union-activity-on-private-property/' class='retweet vert' startCount = '0'>California Court Decision Restricts Union Activity on Private Property</a>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2010/08/california-court-decision-restricts-union-activity-on-private-property/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Government says GDP slows, recession was deeper than previously thought.</title>
		<link>http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2010/07/government-says-gdp-slows-recession-was-deeper-than-previously-thought/</link>
		<comments>http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2010/07/government-says-gdp-slows-recession-was-deeper-than-previously-thought/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2010 15:19:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Shawn McCammon</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business and Entrepreneur]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[small business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business start up]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[consumer confidence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Employment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GDP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[growth]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[revenue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sales]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unemployment]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/?p=211</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Wall Street Journal writes that the U.S. economy slowed in the second quarter of this year and the government said the recession was deeper than earlier believed, adding to concerns over the recovery&#8217;s strength.  The Commerce Department Friday said U.S. gross domestic product, or the value of all goods and services produced, rose at [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: justify;">The Wall Street Journal <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703999304575398870021765454.html?mod=djemTMB_h" target="_blank">writes </a>that the U.S. economy slowed in the second quarter of this year and the government said the recession was deeper than earlier believed, adding to concerns over the recovery&#8217;s strength.  The Commerce Department Friday said U.S. gross domestic product, or the value of all goods and services produced, rose at an annualized seasonally adjusted rate of 2.4% in April to June. In its first estimate of the economy&#8217;s benchmark indicator, the government report showed growth was lifted by business investments and exports. Consumer spending, a key growth engine for the U.S. economy, made a smaller contribution to growth.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Economists polled by Dow Jones Newswires were expecting GDP to rise by 2.5% in the second quarter. In the first quarter, the economy grew by 3.7%, revised up from an originally reported 2.7% increase. But growth estimates all the way back to the start of 2007 were revised lower.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">After suffering its worst downturn since the 1930s, the U.S. economy began taking small steps forward about a year ago, helped by the Federal Reserve&#8217;s slashing of lending rates and the government tax cuts. But recent data have raised questions about the recovery&#8217;s durability. The job market remains weak, with almost one in 10 Americans unemployed, and growth in consumer spending and manufacturing appears to be slowing down.  The government revision of data over the past three years showed that the economy&#8217;s exit from its deep slump was weaker than previously estimated. In the final quarter of 2009, for example, GDP rose at an annualized rate of 5.0% as consumer spending didn&#8217;t grow as much as previously thought. The earlier estimate was that GDP increased by 5.6%.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">In the most recent quarter available, consumer spending rose by a moderate annualized rate of 1.6% in April to June. Spending by Americans, which accounts for more than two-thirds of the economy, rose by 1.9% in the first three months of the year.  Meantime, business spending on equipment and software continued to surge, increasing by 21.9% in the second quarter, compared with a 20.4% rise in the first three months. The figures highlight the contrast in the economy between high company profits and a persistently feeble jobs market keeping consumers at bay.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, who last week said the economy&#8217;s outlook was &#8220;unusually uncertain&#8221;, has stressed the strength of the recovery will depend on whether consumers spend and companies invest enough to make up for fading support from the government. With unemployment still at 9.5% and Americans worried that taxes will need to rise to cut a huge budget deficit, that remains in doubt. When they meet Aug. 10, Fed officials are widely expected to repeat they see interest rates staying close to zero for a while and are likely to at least discuss ways in which they could support the economy further. A Fed official Thursday warned that deflation is a growing risk for the economy.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Economic growth in the U.S. during the second quarter slowed to 2.4%, indicating that the recovery has been weaker than previously expected. David Wessel, Dennis Berman and Evan Newmark discuss. Also, Dennis Berman tells the story about one of the leaders at Tiananmen Square who is now one of the top candidates to manage Berkshire Hathaway&#8217;s investment portfolio.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">In a sign of the economy&#8217;s weakness, Friday&#8217;s report showed price increases continued to move down in the second quarter from already low levels.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">The underlying inflation rate &#8212; which excludes volatile moves in food and energy prices and is closely watched by the Fed &#8212; increased by 1.1% in the April-to-June period from the previous quarter. That was the lowest reading of the core personal consumption expenditure index since the first three months of 2009 and came after a 1.2% rise in the first quarter of this year.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Other inflation gauges within the government&#8217;s report were also muted. The overall price index for personal consumption expenditures rose by only 0.1% in the second quarter, slowing sharply from a 2.1% gain in the first quarter. Gross domestic purchase prices rose just 0.1%, after a 2.1% increase in the first quarter. The chain-weighted GDP price index increased by 1.8%, compared to 1.0% in the first three months.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">For all of 2009, the government said the U.S. economy contracted by 2.6%, compared to the previously estimated 2.4% decline. In the whole of 2008, GDP was flat, instead of rising 0.4% as previously estimated. In 2007, the world&#8217;s largest economy expanded by 2.1%, down from an originally reported 1.9% increase.</p>
<a href='http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2010/07/government-says-gdp-slows-recession-was-deeper-than-previously-thought/' class='retweet vert' startCount = '0'>Government says GDP slows, recession was deeper than previously thought.</a>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2010/07/government-says-gdp-slows-recession-was-deeper-than-previously-thought/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Small Business Owners May be Eligible for Health Care Tax Credit</title>
		<link>http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2010/05/small-business-owners-may-be-eligible-for-health-care-tax-credit/</link>
		<comments>http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2010/05/small-business-owners-may-be-eligible-for-health-care-tax-credit/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 May 2010 15:30:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Shawn McCammon</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business Marketing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business Protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business and Entrepreneur]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[small business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business start up]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business Tax Compliance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[compliance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employment law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health benefits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[health care]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Insurance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legislation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tax Credit]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/?p=197</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In this post by Sarah Needleman of the Wall Street Journal, she points out a new tax credit that may be available to small business owners who pay for health insurance for their employees:
Uncle Sam wants small-business  owners to take notice of a new health-care tax credit &#8212; one of the  first provisions [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: justify;">In this post by Sarah Needleman of the Wall Street Journal, she points out a new tax credit that may be available to small business owners who pay for health insurance for their employees:</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Uncle Sam wants small-business  owners to take notice of a new health-care tax credit &#8212; one of the  first provisions of the recently enacted health-reform law to go into  effect.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Last week, the Internal Revenue Service  announced that it&#8217;s sending postcards to more than four million small  businesses urging them to check if they qualify for the tax break. It&#8217;s  being offered in two phases, with the first worth up to 35% of  qualifying businesses&#8217; premium health-care costs for tax years 2010  through 2013. The rate increases to 50% in 2014. The maximum length of  potential coverage for qualifying employers is six taxable years: four  years under the first phase and two years under the second.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">In general, to be eligible for the tax credit, businesses must cover  at least 50% of the cost of health-care coverage for some of their  workers, employ fewer than the equivalent of 25 full-time workers and  pay average annual wages below $50,000. The IRS says the tax break is  designed to encourage smaller businesses – which are not mandated by  2014 to provide health care, unlike companies with more than 50  employees – to offer health coverage to their low- and moderate-income  workers.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Tammy Rostov, owner of Rostov&#8217;s Coffee &amp; Tea in Richmond, Va.,  says she received the IRS&#8217;s postcard and expects her small retail  business to be eligible for the credit. She offers health coverage to  her five full-time employees and pays 100% of the premium, an amount  that she says has increased by more than 200% over the past six years.  She describes the tax credit as a welcome relief. &#8220;It&#8217;s a step in the  right direction,&#8221; she says.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">But other qualifying business owners are less enthusiastic, arguing  that the tax break won&#8217;t make a significant impact on their bottom  lines.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Pascal Helou, owner of Globotron LLC, a technology-consulting company  in New York, says affording health insurance for his three employees is  a non-issue given that he&#8217;s struggling these days just to stay in  business. Since 2007, he says sales have declined 30% every year and his  firm now has four clients, down from 15.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">&#8220;For my business, this type of tax credit will not make a  difference,&#8221; says Mr. Helou, adding that he has yet to receive the IRS&#8217;s  postcard about it. &#8220;The real issue is the amount of business we&#8217;re  getting. Nobody&#8217;s willing to spend money&#8221; on technology-consulting  services.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Meanwhile, there are also some entrepreneurs who don&#8217;t believe the  government should provide financial incentives for small businesses to  offer health coverage to workers in the first place.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Jim Fab, owner of Fab Electric Inc., an electrical contractor  business in Gaithersburg, Md., falls into this camp. Providing health  insurance and other benefits to his 18 employees, he says, is &#8220;hopefully  what separates me from the electrical contractor that doesn&#8217;t.&#8221;</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Some small businesses appear to be left without any government aide  under the new piece of health-reform legislation. These include  organizations with between 25 and 50 employees and ones with less than  25 employees but payrolls that average $50,000 or more.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Tracy Betts, says her Springfield, Va., Web-design business, Balance  Technology Group Inc., doesn&#8217;t qualify for the credit. While she employs  the equivalent of eight full-time workers, their salaries&#8217; average  $71,000. &#8220;For me, it&#8217;s all about the programmers, and I can&#8217;t hire  anyone for less than $90,000 (in annual pay),&#8221; she says.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Ms. Betts says a year and half ago she told her staff she could only  afford to offer them either health-care coverage or a retirement-savings  plan with a matching contribution from the company. All but one chose  the latter benefit, she says.</p>
<a href='http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2010/05/small-business-owners-may-be-eligible-for-health-care-tax-credit/' class='retweet vert' startCount = '0'>Small Business Owners May be Eligible for Health Care Tax Credit</a>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2010/05/small-business-owners-may-be-eligible-for-health-care-tax-credit/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Industries Poised for Growth</title>
		<link>http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2010/05/industries-poised-for-growth/</link>
		<comments>http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2010/05/industries-poised-for-growth/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 May 2010 15:22:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Shawn McCammon</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business Marketing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business and Entrepreneur]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[small business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business start up]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[consulting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[growth]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[health care]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[industries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[marketing]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/?p=192</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This Smart Money article by Diana Ransom posted at the Wall Street Journal web page discusses several future growth industries.
Much has been said about the Obama administration pushing through new  regulations on everything from health-care companies to banks — not to  mention the impact these changes will have on the overall economy. But [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: justify;">This Smart Money <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704471204575210023871636874.html?mod=djemSB_h" target="_blank">article </a>by Diana Ransom posted at the Wall Street Journal web page discusses several future growth industries.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Much has been said about the Obama administration pushing through new  regulations on everything from health-care companies to banks — not to  mention the impact these changes will have on the overall economy. But  less attention has been paid to the way the new regulations will play  out for entrepreneurs: Will stepped-up regulation stifle or stimulate  growth? SmartMoney spoke with business owners, venture capitalists and  analysts for a snapshot of six industries poised for growth.</p>
<h3>Telecommunications</h3>
<p>Even though shares of  telecom giant <a href="http://online.wsj.com/public/quotes/main.html?type=djn&amp;symbol=VZ">Verizon Communications</a> and  its Finnish counterpart <a href="http://online.wsj.com/public/quotes/main.html?type=djn&amp;symbol=NOK">Nokia</a> fell last week after  reporting lackluster first-quarter results, there may be wind in their  sails yet, says Drew Clark, director of strategy for <a href="http://online.wsj.com/public/quotes/main.html?type=djn&amp;symbol=IBM">IBM</a>&#8217;s Venture Capital Group  in San Mateo, Calif. One boost may come from the president&#8217;s National  Broadband Plan, a program that aims to increase access to mobile  broadband and support a nationwide public safety wireless broadband  network. These firms, along with others, will likely benefit, says  Clark. Per the Obama administration&#8217;s 2009 stimulus package, the  government plans to spend $7.2 billion on the nation&#8217;s broadband  projects.</p>
<h3>Hosted Services</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Perhaps the greatest beneficiaries of the  president&#8217;s broadband agenda are the small companies that will have  better access to faster web channels. FlexiSphere, a Hawthorne, N.Y.,  firm, offers financial services firms so-called cloud computing —  technology that allows firms to share the server of a larger company via  the Internet. As the nation&#8217;s infrastructure improves, so will access  to the company&#8217;s products and services, says Tom Saleh, the company&#8217;s  founder and CEO. &#8220;Cloud computing is all about better, faster, cheaper,&#8221;  he says, adding that this is just a first step. &#8220;Cloud computing is  doing for computing what the Internet did for communications,&#8221; Saleh  says.</p>
<h3>Information Technology</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify;">So far, the  government hasn&#8217;t suggested the need to further regulate the information  technology field, giving these firms a distinct advantage. That&#8217;s  because the uncertainty surrounding regulatory reforms can both stymie a  small company&#8217;s ability to make decisions and trigger a pullback in  investment. In the first quarter of 2010, the IT industry raised $1.5  billion for 192 deals &#8212; the most of any other industry tracked by Dow  Jones VentureSource, a research firm owned by <a href="http://online.wsj.com/public/quotes/main.html?type=djn&amp;symbol=NWS">News Corp.</a>, which also  publishes SmartMoney.com and The Wall Street Journal.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Further, there&#8217;s a lot of pent-up demand for technology, says Karl  Mills, the president and chief investment officer for Jurika Mills &amp;  Keifer, an independent investment advisory firm in Oakland, Calif. &#8220;Old  inventory of technology gets written off quick when it becomes  obsolete. However, during the downturn, many consumers and businesses  put off buying new equipment,&#8221; he says. Plus, many of the larger  companies in this arena, which often scoop up their smaller brethren,  are well capitalized. &#8220;<a href="http://online.wsj.com/public/quotes/main.html?type=djn&amp;symbol=MSFT">Microsoft</a> could write a  check and bail out Greece,&#8221; Mills says.</p>
<h3>Media, Content Production</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify;">With that enhanced infrastructure,  other beneficiaries include media companies and other content providers,  which have struggled in recent years thanks to a precipitous drop in  advertising revenues, says Sal Tirabassi, a partner at M/C Venture  Partners in Boston. Between downloading movies and watching TV online at  home or on a web-enabled mobile device, consumers&#8217; appetites for  content will likely expand, as will advertising opportunities.  &#8220;Advertisers are increasing their budgets slightly again,&#8221; he says.  &#8220;There will be a bit of a rebound there.&#8221;</p>
<h3>Health Care</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Thanks to federal and state stimulus dollars, the  health-care infrastructure in the U.S. is about to get a triple bypass.  Not only does the government plan to plow $20 billion into  computerizing health records, the angel investment community has taken  an interest in the sector. In 2009, health-care services, medical  devices and equipment attracted 17% of total angel investment dollars,  or nearly $3 billion, according to the Center for Venture Research at  the University of New Hampshire. &#8220;We&#8217;re seeing a lot of companies come  through here with technology solutions for innovating medical records,&#8221;  says Michelle Murcia, the chief financial officer of TechColumbus, a  business incubator and venture firm in Columbus, Ohio. &#8220;Health care IT  is a huge growth area.&#8221;</p>
<h3>Clean Energy</h3>
<p style="text-align: justify;">The U.S. Energy Information Administration  projects that global energy consumption will jump 33% between 2010 and  2030. This added demand, combined with a mix of venture-capital  investment and $43 billion in federal stimulus spending bodes well for  businesses that make everything from solar panels and wind turbines to  electricity grids and batteries, says Clark from IBM.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">In addition, the government recently sweetened the tax incentives and  subsidies for homeowners and businesses to install solar and other  forms of energy-saving equipment. &#8220;Despite the fact that we&#8217;ve been in  one of the worst recessions in decades, business in the industry has  grown,&#8221; says David Kaltsas, president of SunWize Technologies&#8217; systems  group, a solar-panel installation and sales firm in Kingston, N.Y.,  which recently launched an installation franchise program. &#8220;Last year  was tough, but we&#8217;ve since grown double-digits in our  direct-installation business.&#8221;</p>
<a href='http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2010/05/industries-poised-for-growth/' class='retweet vert' startCount = '0'>Industries Poised for Growth</a>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2010/05/industries-poised-for-growth/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>COBRA Update, Again&#8230;</title>
		<link>http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2010/04/cobra-update-again/</link>
		<comments>http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2010/04/cobra-update-again/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Apr 2010 21:50:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Shawn McCammon</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Employment Advice & Counseling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Employment Leave & Benefits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Employment Legislation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Employment Termination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[California Labor Code]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[COBRA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employment benefits legislation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employment law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Extension]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legislation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Redding Red Bluff Chico Employment Law Attorney]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/?p=189</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As discussed in my earlier posts  here, congress has repeatedly extended the benefits to employees under COBRA. And now, for the third ime, the COBRA premium subsidy program has been extended, this time through May 31, 2010, under the Continuing Extension Act of 2010 (Act). The key provisions of the Act include:

The extension of the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: justify;">As discussed in my earlier posts  <a href="http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/?p=157" target="_blank">here</a>, congress has repeatedly extended the benefits to employees under COBRA. And now, for the third ime, the COBRA premium subsidy program has been extended, this time through May 31, 2010, under the Continuing Extension Act of 2010 (Act). The key provisions of the Act include:</p>
<ul style="text-align: justify;">
<li>The extension of the      eligibility period for the COBRA subsidy through May 31, 2010.</li>
<li>A new special election period      and related notice requirement for individuals who experience a qualifying      event that is related to a termination of employment on or after April 1,      2010, and before April 15, 2010.</li>
</ul>
<p style="text-align: justify;">The excerpts below are from an article posted by the law firm of Drinker Biddle, a large national law firm.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Special Election Period</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">A health plan must extend a special COBRA election period to an individual who experienced an involuntary termination of employment on or after April 1, 2010, and prior to April 15, 2010, and who would be an “assistance eligible individual” (AEI) but who does not have a COBRA election in effect on April 15, 2010. The special election period runs from April 15, 2010, through the date 60 days after the Notice of Special Election Period is provided to that individual.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><em>Note about effective date of COBRA subsidy.</em> Although not specifically addressed in the Act, due to the short, 15-day gap between the expiration of the COBRA subsidy on March 31, 2010, and enactment of the Act, we believe that an individual’s COBRA subsidy becomes effective as of the first day of COBRA coverage if he or she elects coverage during the special election period.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Notice of Special Election Period</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">In the case of any individual who experienced a qualifying event related to a termination of employment on or after April 1, 2010, and prior to April 15, 2010, a plan administrator must provide the general COBRA notice, including a description of the availability of premium reduction in the case of a qualifying event that is an involuntary termination of employment, within 60 days of enactment of the Act (i.e., by June 14, 2010). If the plan administrator has already distributed the general COBRA notice to such individuals, then the plan administrator may simply supplement it with an additional notice describing the extension of the availability of premium reduction with respect to involuntary terminations through May 31, 2010, and the special election period.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><em>Note about the notice requirement.</em> The Act is not clear on whether this notice applies only to AEIs, or to any individual who has a qualifying event related to a termination of employment, whether voluntary or involuntary, during the period April 1, 2010, through April 14, 2010. The more conservative approach is for a plan administrator to provide the special election notice to any individual who experienced a qualifying event related to a termination of employment on or after April 1, 2010, and prior to April 15, 2010, in order to notify all individuals who may potentially be eligible for the COBRA subsidy, including those who an employer may have incorrectly classified as voluntarily terminated.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>A Reminder – Expansion of Assistance Eligible Individuals</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Under ARRA, only individuals who experienced a qualifying event that was an employee’s involuntary termination of employment could become AEIs and take advantage of the COBRA premium subsidy. The Temporary Extension Act of 2010 expanded the premium subsidy to include as a qualifying event for purposes of the subsidy, a reduction of hours that occurred at any time on or after September 1, 2008, and is followed by an involuntary termination of employment that occurs on or after March 2, 2010 (and before June 1, 2010). Individuals who experience a qualifying event that falls under this expanded definition and are otherwise eligible AEIs (Reduced Hours AEIs) will be eligible for the COBRA subsidy beginning with the first day of the first period of coverage for which the individual is a Reduced Hours AEI. The Reduced Hours AEI’s maximum continuation coverage period is determined as if the individual had elected COBRA when initially eligible due to the reduction of hours.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Action Items</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Plan sponsors and administrators should consider the following immediate action items:</p>
<ul style="text-align: justify;">
<li><em>Notices</em>. Plan administrators should update their COBRA notices      and other plan communications to include the extension of the eligibility      period to May 31, 2010.</li>
<li><em>Assess Prior Terminations</em>. Identify covered employees (and their qualified beneficiaries)      who became eligible for COBRA on or after April 1, 2010, and before April      15, 2010, as well as their COBRA elections. Provide an updated COBRA      notice to these individuals that includes a description of the extended      eligibility period and the special election period. Identify those      employees and beneficiaries in the group whose qualifying event is the      employee’s involuntary termination of employment and who are eligible for      the COBRA subsidy.</li>
<li><em>Continue to Monitor Reduced      Hours AEIs</em>. Plan administrators should      continue to identify any Reduced Hours AEIs, and provide a new notice to      them upon involuntary termination. An individual in this group may be      eligible for the special election period if, upon a reduction in hours the      individual did not elect, or elected and later discontinued, COBRA.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify;"><em>Stay Tuned</em>. Two separate bills in Congress propose to further      extend the COBRA subsidy eligibility period through June 30, 2010, or year      end.</li>
</ul>
<p style="text-align: justify;">
<a href='http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2010/04/cobra-update-again/' class='retweet vert' startCount = '0'>COBRA Update, Again&#8230;</a>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2010/04/cobra-update-again/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Dell Spurs Sales by Lending to Hard-Hit Small Businesses</title>
		<link>http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2010/03/dell-spurs-sales-by-lending-to-hard-hit-small-businesses/</link>
		<comments>http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2010/03/dell-spurs-sales-by-lending-to-hard-hit-small-businesses/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Mar 2010 16:04:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Shawn McCammon</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business Marketing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business and Entrepreneur]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[small business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[business credit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business start up]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business Tax Compliance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dell]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[financing]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/?p=181</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Justin Scheck of the Wall St. Journal writes that &#8220;for years, Dell Inc. has relied on  sales to small businesses for a big chunk of its revenue. It sells more  personal computers to small companies than any tech supplier. Now, it is  offering more credit to spur small business purchases.&#8221;
He goes on [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: justify;">Justin Scheck of the Wall St. Journal writes that &#8220;for years, <a href="http://online.wsj.com/public/quotes/main.html?type=djn&amp;symbol=DELL">Dell</a> Inc. has relied on  sales to small businesses for a big chunk of its revenue. It sells more  personal computers to small companies than any tech supplier. Now, it is  offering more credit to spur small business purchases.&#8221;</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">He goes on to note that &#8220;The financing strategy is showing promise. Its small-and-medium-business  division posted a 10% gain in revenue in the company&#8217;s fiscal fourth  quarter ended Jan. 29 from the same period last year, versus an 11% gain  for the company as a whole. Operating-profit rose 17% from the same  quarter last year to $282 million, surpassing the $281 million in  operating profit from Dell&#8217;s large-business unit, which posted an 8.4%  rise from last year.&#8221;</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">You can read the entire article <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304370304575151883563037548.html?mod=djemSB_h" target="_blank">here</a>, and check out Dell&#8217;s <a href="http://www.dell.com/" target="_blank">page </a>to see if anything interests you! A market snapshot on Dell <a href="http://online.wsj.com/public/quotes/main.html?type=djn&amp;symbol=DELL" target="_blank">here</a>.</p>
<a href='http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2010/03/dell-spurs-sales-by-lending-to-hard-hit-small-businesses/' class='retweet vert' startCount = '0'>Dell Spurs Sales by Lending to Hard-Hit Small Businesses</a>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2010/03/dell-spurs-sales-by-lending-to-hard-hit-small-businesses/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Top 10 email mistakes made by management</title>
		<link>http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2010/02/top-10-email-mistakes-made-by-management/</link>
		<comments>http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2010/02/top-10-email-mistakes-made-by-management/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Feb 2010 02:37:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Shawn McCammon</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Business Protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business and Entrepreneur]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Email]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[grammar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Management]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mistakes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Post]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[subject line]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Top 10]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/?p=163</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Top 10 email mistakes made by management]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: justify;">I saw this guest post by Tim Flood (assistant professor of Management and Corporate Communications at the University of North Carolina&#8217;s Kenan-Flagler Business School ) posted at the Wall St. Journal regarding the 10 most common mistakes management makes in connection with emails, and I thought I would pass it along, enjoy!</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Many of us think we use email well. We don&#8217;t.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Too many of us rush, causing confusion and requiring more time to clarify misunderstandings later. We miss chances to build relationships, motivate others, close deals and convey important information.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Avoid the following ten mistakes.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>1. Using vague subject lines.</strong> &#8220;Meeting,&#8221; &#8220;Update,&#8221; or &#8220;Question&#8221; provide no value as subject lines.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Maximize the subject line&#8217;s message. PDA users will get the message quickly; everyone will appreciate the clear summary. You can communicate plenty in a five to 10 word subject line: &#8220;Your Action Items and Minutes from Last Week&#8217;s Meeting&#8221; or &#8220;Sam: See You at 10:00 Tuesday with Report In-Hand?&#8221;</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>2. Burying the news.</strong> Convey the important points first: put dates, deadlines and deliverables in the first one to three lines of the message (if not also in the subject line). PDA limitations, time pressures, cultural distinctions and value judgments keep many readers from reading further.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>3. Hiding Behind the &#8220;BCC&#8221; field.</strong> At best, the &#8216;blind copy&#8217; field is sneaky and risky. At worst, it&#8217;s deceitful or unethical. Plus, blind recipients sometimes hit &#8220;reply all,&#8221; revealing the deception. Instead, post the initial message and BCC no one. Then forward your sent message to others with a brief explanation.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>4. Failing to clean up the mess of earlier replies/forwards.</strong> Few readers will wade through strings of previous messages.</p>
<ul style="text-align: justify;">
<li>State your      position clearly, even if context follows below in the email string.      &#8220;Yes&#8221; helps less than &#8220;Yes, you can have the extra funding      to hire 5 temporary workers.&#8221;</li>
<li>Summarize      the discussion to date: &#8220;See below: R&amp;D is looking for more time      but Sales risks losing customers if we don&#8217;t act now.&#8221;</li>
<li>Force      focus when necessary: &#8220;Let&#8217;s focus on cost now and revisit the morale      and equity issues at our staff meeting next week.&#8221;</li>
</ul>
<ul style="text-align: justify;">
<li>Change      subject lines cautiously. Tighter, more relevant subject lines work best,      but even one letter&#8217;s difference upsets inbox sorting mechanisms.</li>
<li>Cut      extraneous or repetitive information.</li>
</ul>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>5. Ignoring grammar and mechanics.</strong> PDAs have granted us certain sloppy flexibility, which means you&#8217;ll impress readers even more when you write precisely.</p>
<ul style="text-align: justify;">
<li>Follow      standard punctuation, capitalization and spelling rules.</li>
<li>Think      carefully about the tone different punctuation conveys. &#8220;Dear      Betty,&#8221; is standard, neutral; &#8220;Dear Betty:&#8221; is      professional, perhaps distant; &#8220;Dear Betty!&#8221; is personable,      perhaps excessively so; &#8220;Dear Betty.&#8221; prefaces bad news.</li>
<li>Avoid      over-stylizing with high-priority marks, disorienting color or complex      backgrounds.</li>
</ul>
<ul style="text-align: justify;">
<li>Avoid      all-caps and excessives (like &#8220;!!!!&#8221; or other strings of      punctuation).</li>
</ul>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>6. Avoiding necessarily long emails.</strong> Longer messages sometimes work best; they can help avoid attachments&#8217; hassle and security fuss. Don&#8217;t fear long emails but outline your structure and motivate reading up top.</p>
<ul style="text-align: justify;">
<li>Provide a      &#8216;mapping statement&#8217; to allow readers to skim for key information:      &#8220;I&#8217;ve included information, below, on the background, costs,      implementation schedule and possible problems.&#8221;</li>
<li>Emphasize      the specific response you seek: &#8220;Please let me know, before Monday,      how this project will impact your team.&#8221;</li>
<li>Indicate      an attachment&#8217;s presence and value: &#8220;I&#8217;ve attached slides that I need      you to review before our meeting; those slides identify total costs and      break down the budget.</li>
</ul>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>7. Mashing everything together into bulky, imposing, inaccessible paragraphs. </strong>Length does not discourage reading; bulk does.</p>
<ul style="text-align: justify;">
<li>Keep your      paragraphs short, ideally no more than three to five lines of type.</li>
<li>Open each      paragraph with a bottom-line sentence.</li>
<li>Use      section headings (in all-caps) to facilitate skimming.</li>
</ul>
<ul style="text-align: justify;">
<li>Include      blank lines between paragraphs and section headings.</li>
<li>Avoid italics,      boldface and other typeface changes which do not reliably carry across      email systems.</li>
</ul>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>8. Neglecting the human beings at the other end.</strong> Email travels between actual people, even though we don&#8217;t see or hear each other directly.</p>
<ul style="text-align: justify;">
<li>Praise,      precisely. &#8220;Great job&#8221; takes little time and space but can work      wonders. Quickly wishing someone a good weekend, at the end of an email,      might perk someone up without cluttering your message.</li>
<li>Avoid      conveying blame or delivering negative feedback over email. Talk to the      person instead.</li>
<li>Avoid      sarcasm, caustic wit, off-color humor and potentially inappropriate      remarks —all of these elements tend to confuse, disorient or fall flat      over email.</li>
</ul>
<ul style="text-align: justify;">
<li>Consider      using emoticons and exclamations (&#8220;!&#8221; but also &#8220;ha,      ha&#8221; or &#8220;just kidding&#8221;) when they convey useful emotional      context.</li>
</ul>
<ul style="text-align: justify;">
<li>Adjust      your style to suit your audience. For people who don&#8217;t know you, a terse      style might seem rude; a wordy style might seem unfocused.</li>
</ul>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>9. Thinking email works best.</strong> Email is not always the best way to communicate.</p>
<ul style="text-align: justify;">
<li>Need a      quick answer from someone nearby? Stop by for a visit.</li>
<li>Want a      reply to several unanswered emails? Pick up the phone.</li>
<li>Looking      for more gravitas? Mail a letter.</li>
</ul>
<ul style="text-align: justify;">
<li>Need to      explain a complex or sensitive situation? Arrange a meeting.</li>
</ul>
<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>10. Forgetting that email lasts forever.</strong> Most of us read, send and discard emails at lightning speeds. But don&#8217;t forget that emails remain on a server somewhere as easy-to-forward proof of any error, offense or obfuscation we made.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">
<a href='http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2010/02/top-10-email-mistakes-made-by-management/' class='retweet vert' startCount = '0'>Top 10 email mistakes made by management</a>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2010/02/top-10-email-mistakes-made-by-management/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Is there a new wave of Class Action cases coming in California?</title>
		<link>http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2009/12/is-there-a-new-wave-of-class-action-cases-coming-in-california/</link>
		<comments>http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2009/12/is-there-a-new-wave-of-class-action-cases-coming-in-california/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Dec 2009 18:15:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Shawn McCammon</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Employment Compliance Wage & Hour]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Employmnet Advice & Counseling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[attorney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[california]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Class Action]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[employment law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[labor code.]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lawyer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Seat Regulations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Seating]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wage Orders]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/?p=139</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Apparently, there is a new set of class action cases that have been filed recently against several large employers for alleged &#8220;seating&#8221; violations under the California Labor Code (“Labor Code”). In these cases, plaintiffs seek to enforce Section 14 of the relevant Industrial Welfare Commission (“IWC”) Wage Orders, which until recently was a largely unnoticed [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: justify;">Apparently, there is a new set of class action cases that have been filed recently against several large employers for alleged &#8220;seating&#8221; violations under the California Labor Code (“Labor Code”). In these cases, plaintiffs seek to enforce Section 14 of the relevant Industrial Welfare Commission (“IWC”) Wage Orders, which until recently was a largely unnoticed provision of the Order that requires employers to provide seating for their employees under certain circumstances. While past case law gave employers some comfort, a new Northern District of California decision, <span style="text-decoration: underline;">Curie-White v. Blockbuster,</span> has expanded damages available to plaintiffs in such cases, and will likely lead to further claims being filed.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Section 14 of IWC Wage Order 7 (entitled “Seats”), which is typical of several other industry specific wage orders, requires that (a) all workers shall be provided with suitable seating when the nature of the work reasonably permits it; and (b) when the nature of the work requires standing, the employer must provide reasonable seating in proximity to the work area and employees shall be permitted to use such seats when it does not interfere with the performance of their duties.  However, Section 14 does not contain its own penalty provision and does not address seating claims.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">The new class action claims assert that employers who fail to comply with Wage Order seating requirements violate Section 1198 of the Labor Code, which makes it illegal to employ an employee under conditions that are prohibited by an IWC Wage Order.  These new seating claims have been brought under the Private Attorneys General Action of 2004 (“PAGA”), which allows recovery for violations of all provisions of the Labor Code except those for which a civil penalty is specifically provided.  PAGA penalties consist of $100 for each aggrieved employee per pay period for the first violation, and $200 for each aggrieved employee per pay period for each subsequent violation.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Prior to the decision in <span style="text-decoration: underline;">Curie-White v. Blockbuster</span>, the only court opinion to address a seating claim was in <span style="text-decoration: underline;">Hamilton v. SF Hilton</span> and the decision there weighed heavily in favor of the employer.   However, In <span style="text-decoration: underline;">Curie-White</span>, the court significantly undermined several of the key defenses that had succeeded in the Hamilton case.  Most significantly, the court ruled that plaintiffs may seek civil penalties under PAGA because the penalty provision of the Wage Order “does not provide a penalty for the violation&#8230;specifically a failure to provide seats for employees.”</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Given the conflict between the Hamilton and Curie-White decisions, it is likely that the issue will continue to be litigated in the more recent seating claims cases.  The ultimate resolution in those cases will likely determine whether the these seating claims form a new fad in class action litigation.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">WHAT TO DO:</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">• Document any efforts that have been made to determine whether seats are necessary;</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">• Review and analyze current job descriptions and customer service standards to determine whether they clearly identify jobs where continual mobility and standing are essential functions of the job, and incorporate those standards into the job descriptions;</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">• Provide an adequate number of suitable seats in a nearby break room and allow employees to use the seats when it does not interfere with the performance of their duties.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Here is a link to <a href="http://www.dir.ca.gov/IWC/IWCArticle7.pdf" target="_blank">Wage Order 7,</a> which contains the relevant Seating Requirements at Section 14</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">
<a href='http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2009/12/is-there-a-new-wave-of-class-action-cases-coming-in-california/' class='retweet vert' startCount = '0'>Is there a new wave of Class Action cases coming in California?</a>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://reddingbusinessandemploymentlawblog.com/2009/12/is-there-a-new-wave-of-class-action-cases-coming-in-california/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

