August 18, 2019

August 16, 2019

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

August 15, 2019

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

Oregon Legislative Update

Oregon employers must comply with new laws signed by Governor Kate Brown mandating the provision of sick leave benefits, prohibiting inquiring into or considering an applicant’s criminal conviction history on an employment application form or prior to an interview, limiting non-competition agreements to no longer than 18 months from the date of the employee’s termination, prohibiting discipline of an employee who shares wage information, and requiring the continuation of an employee’s group health insurance coverage during family leave.

These new laws will go into effect on January 1, 2016. 

Paid Sick Leave

Oregon has become the fourth state to mandate that employers provide their employees sick leave benefits. Subject to certain exceptions, Senate Bill 454 applies to all private-sector employers, regardless of the location of the employer’s primary place of business. In addition to reasons for permitted leave, the new law provides for accruing and carrying over of time from year to year. For details of the new law, see our article, Oregon Enacts Paid Sick Leave.

Criminal Conviction History

It is an unlawful practice for an employer to exclude a job applicant from an initial interview solely because of the applicant’s past criminal conviction under H.B. 3025. The legislation applies to all employers, unless they are exempt from the new law. For more on this new law, see our article, Oregon Governor Signs ‘Ban the Box’ Legislation.)

Pay Discussion and Disclosure 

Oregon employers will be prohibited from disciplining an employee who shares wage information under new law. 

H.B. 2007 amends existing law (ORS 659A.885) to provide:

It is an unlawful employment practice for an employer to discharge, demote or suspend, or to discriminate or retaliate against, an employee with regard to promotion, compensation or other terms, conditions or privileges of employment because the employee has:

  • Inquired about, discussed or disclosed in any manner the wages of the employee or of another employee; or

  • Made a charge, filed a complaint or instituted, or caused to be instituted, an investigation, proceeding, hearing or action based on the disclosure of wage information by the employee.

The amendment “does not apply to an employee who has access to wage information of employees as part of the job functions of the employee’s position and discloses the wages of those employees to individuals not authorized access to the information, unless the disclosure is in response to a charge or complaint or is in furtherance of an investigation, proceeding, hearing or action, including but not limited to an investigation conducted by the employer.”

An aggrieved individual may file a complaint with the state Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor and Industries or a civil action in court. Potential remedies include “injunctive relief and any other equitable relief that may be appropriate,” including reinstatement or the hiring of employees with or without back pay of up to two years.

Oregon joins a growing list of states to prohibit employers from discharging, disciplining, or otherwise discriminating against an employee because the employee discloses the amount of his or her wages or salary. Employers should review their policies and procedures to ensure compliance with the new law. 

Non-Compete Limitation

H.B. 3236 amends Oregon’s non-competition law (ORS 653.295) to provide that non-competition agreements entered into on or after January 1, 2016, may not have a term exceeding 18 months from the date of the employee’s termination. The remainder of a term of an agreement in excess of 18 months is voidable and may not be enforced by an Oregon court.

Health Benefits Continuation during Leave

Oregon employers will be required to continue health insurance coverage for an employee out on Oregon Family Leave Act (OFLA) (ORS 659A.150 to 659A.186) leave under a new law.

H.B. 2600 requires continuation of group health insurance coverage for an employee on family leave on the same terms as when the employee is not on leave (the employee is responsible for regular contributions to the cost of premiums). Previously, the law had no requirement for continuation of benefits, except as required by agreement or policy.

Jackson Lewis P.C. © 2019

TRENDING LEGAL ANALYSIS


About this Author

Sarah J. Ryan, Jackson Lewis Law Firm, Labor Employment Attorney
Principal

Sarah J. Ryan is a Principal in the Portland, Oregon, office of Jackson Lewis P.C. She joined Jackson Lewis in late 2012 following over 25 years of employment and litigation practice in Portland, Oregon. Prior to joining the firm, Ms. Ryan chaired the Labor and Employment law practice group at a regional firm with four offices in three states.

Ms. Ryan represents some of Oregon’s leading employers and provides counsel and litigation services in general employment law, as well as a wide range of employee relations issues. Ms...

503-345-4162
April Upchurch Fredrickson, Employer legal advisor, Jackson Lewis, disability accommodation lawyer
Associate

April Upchurch Fredrickson is an Associate in the Portland, Oregon, office of Jackson Lewis P.C. Ms. Upchurch Fredrickson advises employers on a variety of issues including employee discipline and termination, employment discrimination, state and federal leave laws, disability accommodation, wage and hour compliance, employment policies and practices, and non-compete agreements.

In dealing with her clients, Ms. Upchurch Fredrickson emphasizes the importance of preventive counseling to minimize the risk of costly litigation. In addition to counseling clients, Ms. Upchurch Fredrickson litigates single plaintiff and class action cases in state and federal court, and appears before administrative agencies such as the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the National Labor Relations Board, and the Department of Labor and Industries.

503-345-4153