A lawsuit has been filed against Cal/OSHA regarding its recently instituted regulations requiring employers to adopt numerous COVID-19 measures. In addition, a separate suit was filed against Governor Newsom for the outdoor dining ban that is part of recent COVID-19-related regional restrictions.
Specifically, the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) teamed with the National Retail Federation and three NFIB small business owner members to sue the California Division of Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA), the California agency that recently instituted extensive regulations impacting employers. The suit claims that Cal/OSHA, in instituting these regulations, failed to provide public notice and hold public hearings required under California’s Administrative Procedure Act and that it exceeded its authority under the California Occupational Safety and Health Act.
The suit also cited the expense the regulations will cause struggling small California businesses who are already struggling during the pandemic. The suit further claims that the regulations conflict with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines, as the regulations require a 14-day workplace exclusion even if an employee exposed to COVID-19 tests negative, while the CDC recommends a 7-day quarantine in the event of a negative test and no symptoms. The lengthier quarantine period is cited as particularly expensive and burdensome to small businesses, as it causes a need to find qualified replacements for the longer time frame.
In another lawsuit, the owner of the Pineapple Hill Saloon & Grill in Sherman Oaks challenged Governor Gavin Newsom in federal court, seeking to overturn the outdoor dining ban that affects Southern California and other state regions, claiming Governor Newson exceeded his authority in instituting the ban without supporting scientific evidence. The outdoor dining ban is part of the California regional restrictions that apply when intensive care unit capacity drops below 15%. When Southern California and other regions hit that benchmark, the outdoor ban and other restrictions went into effect, at a time when numerous restaurant owners had only recently incurred great expense to permit outdoor dining on their premises. This suit follows the recent suit by Mark Geragos and the California Restaurant Association that challenged an extension of Los Angeles County’s ban on outdoor dining beyond its scheduled end on December 16, 2020. The judge in that case agreed that before the ban can be extended, a risk-benefit analysis must be undertaken to justify the ban. However, the regional ban that remains in effect until at least December 28, 2020 has shut down outdoor dining in Los Angeles County along with most other counties in California.
The author would like to gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Joanne Warriner.
- Partner
Kelly Scott is a partner and head of the firm’s Employment Law Department.
Mr. Scott is also a member of the Litigation Department and has practiced law since 1987. His areas of practice include representation of employers in all ...
Subscribe
Recent Posts
- Landlord: Look Out and Take Notice | By: Geoffrey M. Gold
- New Cal/OSHA Indoor Heat Standards Require New Prevention Measures and Written Prevention Plan | By: Joanne Warriner
- California Bans All Plastic Bags at Grocery Stores | By: Pooja S. Nair
- FTC’s Nationwide Ban on Non-Compete Agreements Stopped by Federal Court Ruling | By: Cate A. Veeneman
- Can the IRS Obtain a Receiver to Help Collect Taxes Owed? | By: Peter Davidson
- Severing Unconscionable Terms in Employment Arbitration Agreements | By: Jared W. Slater
- Can You Collaterally Attack a Receiver’s Appointment?
- Changes to PAGA Create Opportunities for Employers to Minimize Penalties | By: Tanner Hosfield
- Overbroad Employment Arbitration Agreements Will Not Be Enforced in California | By: Jared W. Slater
- LA Al Fresco Deadline Extended | By: Pooja S. Nair
Blogs
Contributors
Archives
- October 2024
- September 2024
- August 2024
- July 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- October 2023
- September 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014