Nebraska Updates Minimum Wage Law with Fixed Annual Increases and New Youth Training Wages

Who: Nebraska employers with 4 or more employees

When: Effective July 17, 2026

Governor Jim Pillen signed LB 258 on February 9, 2026, amending the Nebraska Wage and Hour Act to replace consumer price index-based minimum wage adjustments with a fixed annual increase, establish a new minimum wage for certain youth workers, and revise the training wage for newer workers. These changes take effect July 17, 2026.

Nebraska’s minimum wage reached $15.00 per hour on January 1, 2026, and had previously been scheduled to increase each subsequent January 1 based on the Consumer Price Index for the Midwest Region. Under LB 258, that index-based mechanism has been eliminated. Starting January 1, 2027, the minimum wage will instead increase by a fixed 1.75% annually. The Nebraska Department of Labor will publish each year’s adjusted rate by October 15 of the prior year, beginning in October 2026.

New Youth Minimum Wage (Ages 14–15)

Effective July 17, 2026, employers may pay a wage of $13.50 per hour to employees who are at least 14 but under 16 years of age, provided they are not emancipated minors. Beginning January 1, 2030, and every five years thereafter, the youth minimum wage will increase by 1.5%, rounded to the nearest cent.

Updated Training Wage (Ages 16–19)

The training wage for new employees between the ages of 16 and 19 is set at $13.50 per hour through December 31, 2026. Beginning January 1, 2027, the training wage will increase annually by 1.5%, rounded to the nearest cent. The training wage does not apply to seasonal or migrant workers or to emancipated minors.

The training wage is available for up to 90 days from the employee’s date of hire. A single additional 90-day extension is permitted only if the position requires technical, personal, or other skills necessary for the employment and the training program is approved by the Nebraska Commissioner of Labor.

Employers may pay no more than one-fourth of total hours at the training wage in a given period. Employers may not reduce or eliminate existing employees’ hours as a means of replacing them with lower-paid trainees.

What Remains Unchanged

The tipped employee wage structure is unchanged. Employers may continue to pay tipped employees $2.13 per hour, provided that tips bring total compensation to at least the applicable minimum wage. Student-learners participating in bona fide vocational training programs may continue to be paid 75% of the applicable minimum wage.

How:

• Confirm your payroll system reflects the $15.00 minimum wage through December 31, 2026.
• Create a youth wage pay code in your payroll system for employees ages 14 through 15 (non-emancipated), set at $13.50/hour starting July 17, 2026. Build controls to automatically deactivate this pay code at the employee’s 16th birthday or upon any change in emancipation status.
• Create a training wage pay code for eligible new employees ages 16 through 19 (non-seasonal, non-emancipated), set at $13.50/hour through December 31, 2026.
• Audit scheduling to ensure that training-wage hours do not exceed 25% of your total establishment hours in any given period.
• Train managers on the prohibition against reducing existing employees’ hours to substitute lower-paid trainees.
• Verify that tipped employees’ combined cash wages and tips meet or exceed the applicable minimum wage each pay period, and maintain documentation of this calculation.
• Update Nebraska wage posters and any relevant employee handbook sections before July 17, 2026.
• Monitor for the release of the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry’s final rules.

Additional Resources:

LB 528

Arizona Expands Military Leave Law

Who: Arizona employers with employees whose workforce includes National Guard members or U.S. Armed Forces Reservists

When: Effective September 12, , 2026

Governor Katie Hobbs signed HB 2663 on June 4, 2026, which broadens Arizona’s military leave law. Starting September 12, 2026, covered employees are entitled to job-protected leave for any military training ordered by the state or federal government — not just the specific activities the law used to name, such as camps, maneuvers, formations, and armory drills.

How:

• Review and update your policies and employee handbooks to include leave requests for military training.
• Update leave administration procedures as needed.
• Train HR staff and supervisors on the expanded qualifying reasons for military leave.

Additional Resources

H.B. 2663

Arizona State Legislature

Arizona Legislature – HB 2663 Fact Sheet

Washington New I-9 Notice Requirement

Who: Washington employers

When: Effective October 1, 2026

Governor Bob Ferguson signed the Immigrant Worker Protection Act, HB 2105, on March 31, 2026. The law takes effect on October 1, 2026, and creates a new employee notice requirement tied to I-9 inspections.

An employer that receives a federal notice of inspection covering I-9 employment eligibility records must now notify workers and post a notice within five days. The notice must include a copy of the inspection notice itself, the name of the inspecting agency, the date the employer received it, and the records the inspecting agency requested. If the inspection turns up any deficiencies, the employer must notify affected employees in writing, specifying what’s wrong, how much time they have to fix it, and the date by which the issue must be resolved.

The law bars employers from retaliating against workers who exercise their rights under the law; violations can result in civil and statutory penalties.

How:

• Review your I-9 inspection policies, including your communication plan.
• Train HR and managers on I-9 compliance.
• Run an I-9 audit.
• Watch the Washington Attorney General’s website for the immigration rights poster and post it once it is released.
• Consult legal counsel to conduct a compliance audit.

Additional Resources

HB 2105

Attorney General’s website

Hawaii Expands Family Leave to Cover Military Exigency Leave

Who: Hawaii employers with 100 or more employees

When: Effective immediately

On May 19, 2026, Hawaii Governor Josh Green signed Act 13 (formerly SB 3082) into law, expanding the Hawaii Family Leave Law (HFLL) to cover “qualifying military exigencies” effective July 1, 2026.

The HFLL applies to employers with 100 or more employees and to employees who have worked for at least six months. Those employees can now take up to four weeks of unpaid, job-protected leave per calendar year for a qualifying military exigency, on top of the law’s existing leave for the birth or adoption of a child or for caring for a family member with a serious health condition.

The definition mirrors the federal FMLA’s military exigency provisions at 29 C.F.R. § 825.126, and includes things like short-notice deployment, military events, arranging childcare or school activities, financial and legal arrangements, counseling, rest and recuperation, post-deployment activities, and parental care needs.

The exigency must relate to active-duty service by the employee’s child, spouse, reciprocal beneficiary, sibling, grandchild, or parent.

Employees requesting this leave must give advance notice and provide a copy of the military orders supporting the request.

Many Hawaii employers already provide FMLA military exigency leave to eligible employees. Because HFLL’s eligibility rules (100+ employees, six months of service) differ from the FMLA’s, employers should map out how the two laws interact for employees who may qualify under one law but not the other.

How:

• Update your employee handbooks, leave policies, forms, and processes to include military exigency leave.
• Train HR, managers, and supervisors on the new leave category, including how it interacts with the federal FMLA.

Additional Resources

Act 13 (SB 3082 CD1)

29 C.F.R. § 825.126 (Leave because of a qualifying exigency)

Hawaii Department of Labor and Industrial Relations: Hawaii Family Leave

Maine Paid Family and Medical Leave Benefits Begin May 1, 2026

Who: Maine employers

When: Effective immediately

Employees became eligible for benefits pursuant to Maine’s Paid Family and Medical Leave (PFML) program on May 1, 2026. Employers must either participate in the state-run program or offer a private plan with equal benefits. The PFML program offers up to 12 weeks of leave in a 12-month period. Covered employees can take leave continuously or intermittently.

Employees can apply for leave for the following reasons:

• Bonding with a new child;
• Caring for a family member with a serious condition;
• Managing the employee’s own serious health condition;
• Addressing certain military-related family needs; and
• Seeking safety related to abuse or violence.

While an employee is on PFML, employers must continue to provide health insurance, accrue PTO or other time-off benefits, and allow employees to continue earning bonuses and pursuing advancement opportunities.

Employers can’t require employees to use all of their paid vacation or sick days before taking Paid Family and Medical Leave. Benefits can run concurrently with unpaid leave under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). Employers must restore an employee to their position or an equivalent position when they return from leave, as long as the employee has been employed for at least 120 days.

How:

• Register your business on the Maine Paid Leave Portal.
• Review your policies related to leave, payroll, and benefits to ensure they comply with the law.
• Train HR personnel and managers on the law and its requirements.
• Post the Maine Paid Leave Poster in the workplace.
• Provide written notice of the Maine Paid Leave to employees upon hire.

Additional Resources:

Paid Family and Medical Leave Poster

Paid Family and Medical Leave Frequently Asked Questions

Maine Paid Family and Medical Leave

Maine Paid Family and Medical Leave for Employers

Maine Enacts Pay Transparency Law Requiring Wage Range Disclosures

Who: Maine employers with 10 or more employees

When: Effective July 29, 2026

Maine Governor Janet Mills signed LD 54 on April 24, 2026, making Maine the latest state to require employers to disclose pay ranges and maintain employee compensation records. The law takes effect July 29, 2026.

The law applies differently depending on employer size. Notably, the statute does not specify whether the 10-employee threshold applies only to employees in Maine or to the employer’s total workforce company-wide. This ambiguity will likely require further clarification.

Job Posting Requirements (Employers with 10 or More Employees)

Employers with 10 or more employees must include a pay range in all job postings, whether those postings are made electronically or in print, and whether the employer posts them or goes through a third party such as a recruiting firm. The only exception is for positions compensated solely on a commission basis; for those roles, the posting must indicate that compensation is commission-based.

A “range of pay” is defined as the range an employer anticipates relying on when setting wages for the position. This definition encompasses any of the following: an applicable pay scale; a previously established wage range for the role; the actual range of wages paid to those currently holding equivalent positions; or the budgeted amount for the position.

Employee Request and Recordkeeping Requirements (All Employers)

Regardless of size, all Maine employers must disclose the pay range for a position to any current employee who requests it. Employers must also maintain a record of each position held by every employee, along with that employee’s pay history in each role, for the duration of the employment relationship and for three years following the termination of employment.

The law provides immediate funding for a new Maine Department of Labor inspector position specifically dedicated to enforcing the pay range disclosure and recordkeeping requirements, signaling that Maine intends to enforce these obligations actively.

How:

• Audit all current job postings—both internal and external—to ensure that they include a defined pay range, in addition to performing periodic reviews of all job postings.
• If your organization works with recruiting agencies or third-party job boards, confirm that they are aware of the requirement and will comply on your behalf.
• Implement a recordkeeping system that captures each employee’s job title history and pay rate at each level and ensures you are preserving that information for at least three years following an employee’s departure.
• Consult legal counsel to assess how the 10-employee threshold applies to your specific workforce—particularly if you have employees both inside and outside Maine—and develop a compliance plan tailored to your organization to ensure compliance with the new law.

Additional Resources:

LD 54 – “An Act to Require Employers to Disclose Pay Ranges and Maintain Records of Employees’ Pay Histories”

26 MRSA §622-A(1)(B)

Massachusetts New I-9 Notice Requirement

Who: Massachusetts employers

When: Effective immediately

Governor Maura Healey signed the PROTECT Act on August 5, 2026, and it took effect immediately. Section 8 of the law is the part that matters for I-9 compliance. This means Massachusetts employers have a new notice obligation when Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) comes to their door.

If an employer receives a Notice of Inspection from ICE regarding I-9 forms or other employment records, they must give written notice to every employee within 48 hours of receiving the notice, in addition to the existing three-day federal notice requirement. If the inspection turns up deficiencies, employers must notify employees in writing, detailing what’s wrong, how much time they have to fix it, and the date by which to do so.

The PROTECT Act is part of a broader effort to limit ICE’s presence at sensitive locations like courthouses, schools, and hospitals, but this brief focuses specifically on the I-9 notice. Massachusetts has issued its own guidance and a required sample notice template for employers. The new provision doesn’t spell out its own penalties, though existing state law allows fines of $200 to $500 for related violations.

How:

• Update your I-9 inspection response plan to include the 48-hour employee notice requirement.
• Decide ahead of time who will handle ICE notices.
• Work with legal counsel to draft your notice template.
• Ensure that you maintain current audits of your I-9 records and are able to retrieve and update them quickly.
• Train HR personnel and anyone who handles I-9 compliance on the new requirement.
• If you receive a Notice of Inspection, consult legal counsel.

Additional Resources

Massachusetts Protect Act

Commonwealth of Massachusetts Protecting People From Ice

Guidance for Employers on New State Law Notice Requirement for I-9 Inspections

Connecticut Data Privacy Act Amendments Expand Coverage and Consumer Rights

Who: Connecticut employers

When: Effective immediately

Connecticut enacted SB 1295 on June 24, 2025, which amends the Connecticut Data Privacy Act (CTDPA), with most changes effective July 1, 2026, and new impact-assessment requirements effective August 1, 2026.

The amendments substantially lower the law’s applicability thresholds. The CTDPA previously applied only to businesses processing the personal data of at least 100,000 Connecticut residents or 25,000 residents where 25% or more of revenue came from data sales. As amended, the law also applies to any business processing at least 35,000 residents’ personal data, or to any business, regardless of size, that processes consumers’ sensitive data or sell personal data at all. The amendment replaces the blanket entity-level exemption for Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act–regulated entities with a narrower data-level exemption.

The amended law expands the definition of “sensitive data” to include neural data, nonbinary and transgender status, additional biometric and genetic data, government-issued identification numbers, and financial account information. Covered entities may longer sell sensitive data without consumer consent.

Consumers gain expanded rights, including the right to a list of third parties to whom their data has been sold, access to inferences drawn from their data, and new rights concerning automated profiling. They have an expanded profiling opt-out that no longer requires the decision to be based solely on automated processing, and, in housing-related decisions, the ability to correct inaccurate data and request a re-evaluation. Minors under 18 are also prohibited from having their personal data shared for targeted advertising or sales.

Businesses engaged in covered profiling must now conduct impact assessments. Privacy notices must also disclose covered entities use personal data to train large language models, and they must notify consumers before material retroactive changes to a privacy notice take effect.

The CTDPA’s statutory cure period, which previously allowed businesses an opportunity to correct violations before enforcement, expired at the end of 2024 and has not been reinstated.

How:

• Review your internal governance practices and policies to ensure compliance.
• Ensure that your privacy notices are up to date.

Additional Resources

SB 1295

Connecticut Amends Its Privacy Law

Who: Connecticut businesses subject to the Connecticut Data Privacy Act (CTDPA), including certain employers that use personal data for profiling or automating employment decisions.

When: Effective October 1, 2026

Governor Ned Lamont signed SB 4 (Public Act 26-64) on May 27, 2026, which significantly expanded the Connecticut Data Privacy Act (CTDPA). The state legislature later passed additional amendments through HB 5222 and HB 5563. Most of the new obligations take effect on October 1, 2026.

The law affects employers that use personal data for profiling or automated decisions that could have a legal or similarly significant effect on an individual. It also shrinks the CTDPA’s carve-out for employment activity and folds in new transparency, individual rights, assessment, and oversight obligations under circumstances where that kind of profiling happens.

The law also includes requirements for data brokers, facial recognition, precise geolocation data, personalized pricing, and certain genetic data, though those pieces are aimed more at consumer-facing businesses.

Employers should pay particular attention to technology used for significant employment decisions, such as hiring or performance-related decisions.

How:

• Identify automated or profiling tools you use for significant employment decisions.
• Conduct or update the data protection impact assessments the law requires whenever you use profiling that could significantly affect an employee, such as in automated hiring or performance decisions.
• Review and update the applicable privacy notices and internal governance procedures.
• Check whether your HR screening tools and technology vendors are compliant.

Additional Resources

SB 4

HB 5222

HB 5563

Connecticut Pay Transparency

Who: Connecticut employers

When: Effective October 1, 2026

Connecticut has expanded its pay transparency requirements under An Act Concerning Workforce Development and Working Conditions in the State. Governor Ned Lamont signed HB 5003 on May 11, 2026, and the new requirements take effect on October 1, 2026. Employers must include a wage range and a general description of benefits in both internal and external job postings, such as health insurance, retirement, fringe benefits, and paid leave. Employers must share the information with applicants as soon as they ask for it, or before pay comes up in conversation, rather than waiting until an offer is made.

The wage range must reflect what the employer genuinely intends to pay in good faith, based on factors such as the existing pay scale, past ranges for the role, or what current employees in similar positions earn. The rule covers any Connecticut-based position, as well as remote roles that report to a Connecticut supervisor, office, or worksite.

There’s an extra requirement for larger employers: Those with 100 or more employees must publish guides on pay statements that explain their pay codes, overtime codes, and wage differences. Employers must make the guide available on their website, send it to every new hire, and update the guide whenever a code changes or pay codes are added

How:

• Update your job postings to reflect the required pay range and benefits.
• Train HR and hiring managers on the disclosure requirements and timing.
• Conduct salary audits to confirm postings match your compensation practices.
• Make sure payroll has current pay-code guides ready (for employers with 100 or more employees).

Additional Resources

HB 5003

Connecticut Artificial Intelligence Responsibility and Transparency Act

Who: Connecticut employers

When: Effective October 1, 2026; chatbot law effective January 1, 2027

Governor Ned Lamont signed the Connecticut Artificial Intelligence Responsibility and Transparency Act (SB 5, Public Act 26-15) on May 27, 2026. It’s a broad AI law covering developers, deployers, and providers of AI technologies, with compliance dates staggered from 2026 into 2027.

Starting October 1, 2026, employers can’t shift the blame to an AI tool or vendor for an employment decision; responsibility for the outcome stays with the employer. Employers subject to the federal WARN Act also face a new wrinkle: If a covered layoff is connected to AI or other technological change, they must report it to the Connecticut Department of Labor.

Additional requirements take effect October 1, 2027, including disclosure and written-notice obligations tied to certain automated employment decision tools.

How:

• Take inventory of the automated tools you use across the employment lifecycle.
• Go through your AI vendor contracts with an eye for discrimination exposure and compliance gaps.
• Examine bias testing and build in human oversight steps.
• Update your WARN Act notification procedures.
• Start preparing for October 1, 2027, disclosure and notice requirements.

Additional Resources

SB 5 Connecticut Artificial Intelligence Responsibility and Transparency Act

New Jersey Significantly Expands Family Leave Coverage

Who: New Jersey employers with 15 or more employees

When: Effective July 17, 2026

On January 17, 2026, then-Governor Phil Murphy signed A3451/S2950, amending the New Jersey Family Leave Act (NJFLA) and the laws governing Temporary Disability Insurance (TDI) and Family Leave Insurance (FLI) benefits. These amendments take effect on July 17, 2026, and mark the most significant expansion of the NJFLA.. They lower the employer coverage threshold, make it easier for employees to qualify for protected leave, and strengthen job protection rights.

Under current law, the NJFLA applies to employers with 30 or more employees and grants protected leave to employees who have worked for at least 12 months and logged at least 1,000 hours in the preceding 12 months. Both of those thresholds change materially on July 17, and smaller employers who have previously been outside the law’s scope now need to comply.

Expanded Employer Coverage

The employer coverage threshold drops from 30 employees to 15 employees, with all employees counted regardless of their location. This means that even an employer with only one New Jersey-based employee could be covered if the company’s total workforce reaches 15 or more. Notably, the coverage threshold will continue to decrease in subsequent years: to 10 employees as of July 17, 2027, and to five employees as of July 17, 2028.

Reduced Employee Eligibility Requirements

The eligibility criteria for NJFLA leave have been substantially lowered. Rather than requiring 12 months of employment and 1,000 hours worked, employees will now qualify after only three months of employment and 250 hours worked in the preceding 12 months. This change is expected to significantly increase the number of eligible employees, particularly in industries with part-time workforces or higher turnover.

Expanded Job Protections for TDI and FLI Recipients

The amendments add language to the TDI and FLI benefit statutes stating that employer must reinstate employees who receive those benefits to the same or equivalent position following their leave. Previously, TDI and FLI were treated as wage replacement benefit programs without an accompanying job protection guarantee. Other amendment language states that nothing in the change should be construed as modifying any entitlement provided by the NJFLA itself, which creates some ambiguity. Because the relevant language was added to the benefits statutes rather than the NJFLA directly, the precise scope of these new job protection rights remains unclear and employers should monitor for further guidance.

Employee Choice in Leave Sequencing

Employees who are eligible for paid sick leave under the New Jersey Earned Sick and Safe Leave Law and for either TDI or FLI benefits have the right to choose the order in which they use those benefits. Employees may not receive earned sick leave and TDI or FLI benefits simultaneously, so they may not use sick leave to supplement state benefit payments.

The NJFLA continues to provide up to 12 weeks of unpaid, job-protected leave during any 24-month period for qualifying reasons, including bonding with a new child within one year of the child’s birth or placement for adoption or foster care, to care for a family member with a serious health condition, and during a state of emergency to cover for a family member who is isolated or quarantined, and to care for a child whose school is closed due to a public health emergency. The amendment does not change the qualifying reasons.

How:

• Determine whether your organization now meets the 15-employee threshold under the amended law, counting all employees regardless of where they are located.
• Update your employee handbooks, and leave policies, to comply with the law.
• Ensure all employee leaves are tracked, including the start and return dates, the reason for leave, and who approved the leave.
• Train HR personnel, managers, and supervisors on expanded coverage, eligibility rules, reinstatement obligations, and anti-retaliation requirements.
• Post the updated NJFLA poster notice in your workplace once an updated version is released by the New Jersey Division on Civil Rights, and distribute updated poster notice to employees.

Additional Resources:

A3451

New Jersey Division of Civil Rights Discrimination in Employment

New Jersey Family Leave Act (NJFLA)

New Jersey Releases the Final ABC Rule

Who: New Jersey employers that use independent contractors, freelancers, or other nonemployee workers.

When: Effective October 1, 2026

New Jersey’s Department of Labor and Workforce Development finalized new rules for classifying workers under the ABC test on May 5, 2026. The rules take effect on October 1, 2026. The rules apply to any New Jersey employer that engages contractors, freelancers, or other nonemployee workers.

New Jersey starts from the assumption that a worker is an employee, and it’s on the employer to establish all three parts of the ABC test:

• The worker is free from the company’s control and direction, in both contract and practice;
• The work falls outside the company’s usual business, or happens outside all of its locations; and
• The worker is regularly engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, or business of their own.

A signed 1099 or contractor agreement alone doesn’t settle the question. The rules also make it clear that circumstances such as holding multiple jobs, working part-time, forming an LLC, or carrying insurance don’t automatically prove independence, especially if the company required or encouraged those steps.

How:

• Review your contractor agreements, policies, and procedures to ensure they are compliant.
• Audit all independent contractor relationships.
• Consult legal counsel about workers who may need to be reclassified.

Additional Resources:

Final Rule

For employers: Independent contractors vs. employees

Virginia Enacts Pay Transparency Law and Salary History Ban

Who: Viriginia employers

When: Effective July 1, 2026

Virginia Governor Abigail Spanberger signed HB 636 and SB 215—companion bills—on April 22, 2026, enacting new pay transparency requirements and a salary history ban. The law takes effect July 1, 2026, and applies to all employers in Virginia without a minimum employee threshold. Virginia is the first Southern state to enact this type of law.

The law requires employers to include compensation information in all job postings and prohibits employers from seeking or relying on an applicant’s wage or salary history when making hiring or compensation decisions. It also creates a private right of action, which makes Virginia one of only two states to provide employees and applicants with the ability to sue directly for job-posting violations.

Salary History Ban

Virginia employers may not seek a prospective employee’s wage or salary history from the applicant or from prior employers. Employers also may not rely on that history when deciding whether to extend an offer or when setting starting pay. The prohibition covers all forms of pay inquiry, formal and informal, including an interviewer’s casual question about current compensation.

There is one limited exception: If an applicant voluntarily discloses their wage or salary history without any prompting from the employer, the employer may use that information solely to confirm the disclosed history or to support offering a higher wage provided that doing so does not violate state or federal equal pay laws. The employer may not use voluntarily disclosed history to justify a lower offer.

Pay Range Disclosure Requirements

Every public and internal job posting for any position—including promotions, transfers, and other employment opportunities—must include the wage, salary, or wage or salary range for the role. A “wage or salary range” is defined as the minimum and maximum compensation for the position, set in good faith by reference to a pay scale, a previously determined range, the actual range paid to employees currently in equivalent positions, or the budgeted amount. Good faith is assessed in part by considering whether the range is unreasonably broad.

The disclosure requirement covers all job postings, including those for internal opportunities. General language such as “competitive compensation” does not satisfy the requirement.

Anti-Retaliation Protections

Employers may not fire, discipline, fail to hire, fail to promote, or otherwise penalize any applicant or current employee for requesting a wage range, declining to disclose salary history, or otherwise exercising their rights under the law.

Enforcement and Liability

The law creates a two-track enforcement model. The Virginia Attorney General may bring a civil action and seek civil penalties of up to $1,000 for a first violation and up to $5,000 for subsequent violations. Separately, any aggrieved prospective employee or employee may file a private civil action within one year of the alleged violation to recover actual damages and other legal or equitable relief.

For violations related to job posting failures, a 15-business-day cure period applies. If an employer corrects the posting within 15 business days of receiving written notice, no civil action may be brought for that specific posting violation. A single notice for any given posting is sufficient for the duration of that posting. The cure period does not apply to salary history inquiries or retaliation claims.

How:

• Audit all job applications and interview protocols to identify and remove any questions about an applicant’s prior or current compensation.
• Establish defined, good-faith pay ranges for every position in your organization. Maintain documentation supporting the basis for each range (pay scale, market data, internal benchmarks, or budgeted amount).
• Update all public and internal job postings to include the required wage or salary range
• Update employee handbooks and HR policies to reflect the salary history ban and the anti-retaliation protections.
• Train all hiring personnel on the new requirements of the law

Additional Resources:

SB 215

HB 636

Virginia Further Restricts Non-Compete Agreements for Discharged Employees

Who: Virginia employers

When: Effective July 1, 2026

Virginia Governor Abigail Spanberger signed Senate Bill 170 on April 13, 2026, amending Virginia’s non-compete statute to further limit the enforceability of restrictive covenants. The law takes effect July 1, 2026, and applies to any non-compete agreement entered into, renewed, or amended on or after that date. Agreements executed before July 1, 2026, are not affected.

Under the new law, a non-compete agreement is unenforceable if an employer discharges an employee without cause and does not provide severance pay or other monetary payment. The law requires that employers disclose any severance benefits or other monetary payments that will support the enforceability of the non-compete to the employee at the time the agreement is executed, not at the time of separation. The statute does not define what constitutes “for cause” termination, nor does it specify a minimum amount of severance or other monetary payment. Both questions will be subject to judicial interpretation over time.

SB 170 applies to all employees in Virginia, not just low-wage employees. This is a meaningful expansion. Virginia already prohibits non-compete agreements for “low-wage” employees, defined as those whose average weekly earnings are less than the state’s average weekly wage (currently $1,507.01 per week, or $78,364.52 per year) or who are classified as non-exempt under the FLSA. Non-Solicitation Provisions Also Implicated

A Court of Appeals of Virginia’s January 2026 ruling in Sentry Force Security, LLC v. Barrera held that a customer non-solicitation clause restricting direct solicitation does not fall within the statutory definition of a non-compete, but a clause that prohibits accepting unsolicited business from customers—as well as employee non-solicitation agreements—does fall within the statutory restrictions. The distinction between soliciting customers and accepting their unsolicited business is therefore consequential when drafting these agreements. Nondisclosure agreements protecting trade secrets or confidential information are not affected.

Enforcement and Remedies

Any employee may bring a civil action against an employer that attempts to enforce an unlawful non-compete. Such actions must be filed within two years of the later of the date the covenant was signed, the date the employee learned of the covenant, the date employment ended, or the date of the enforcement attempt. Courts may void unlawful covenants and award injunctive relief, liquidated damages, lost compensation, and attorneys’ fees and costs. Employers are further prohibited from retaliating against employees who bring such actions.

Employers who violate the prohibition on non-competes for low-wage employees or who attempt to enforce a non-compete against a discharged employee without severance may face civil penalties of $10,000 per violation.

SB 170 also requires employers to post a copy of the law or a summary approved by the Virginia Department of Labor and Industry in the same location where other required employee notices are displayed. Failure to comply with this posting requirement may result in civil penalties of up to $1,000.

How:

• Audit all offer letters, restrictive covenant agreements, and employment agreements that include non-solicitation and non-competes clauses or other appropriate language to ensure they comply with the law.
• Revise your standard non-compete agreement templates to include disclosure of any severance benefits or other monetary payments provided upon separation at the time of signing, ensuring the agreement’s enforceability.
• Clearly define “for cause” termination clearly in your non-compete agreements, since the statute does not define the term and courts will have discretion in interpreting it. Work with employment counsel to develop language that accurately reflects your organization’s termination practices.
• Post the required copy of Virginia’s non-compete law or an approved summary in your workplace alongside other mandatory employee notices.
• Train HR personnel and hiring managers stay informed about the new legal requirements and update policies and templates as needed.
• Consult employment counsel before renewing or amending any existing non-compete agreement.

Additional Resources:

SB 170

Sentry Force Security, LLC v. Barrera

Tennessee Establishes First Statutory Framework for Non-Compete Agreements

Who: Tennessee employers

When: Effective July 1, 2026

Tennessee Governor Bill Lee signed House Bill 1034 on May 7, 2026, establishing the state’s first comprehensive statutory framework governing restrictive covenant agreements. The law takes effect July 1, 2026, and applies to any agreement entered into, renewed, or amended on or after that date, as well as any proceedings occurring on or after that date.

Tennessee courts have looked at non-compete agreements on a case-by-case basis, focusing on whether they’re reasonable—without clear rules about how long they can last. The new law helps bring more clarity, offering starting assumptions about their duration and explicitly banning non-competes for employees earning below a certain amount.

Rebuttable Presumptions on Duration

The law establishes a tiered framework of rebuttable presumptions for whether a restrictive covenant’s duration is reasonable:

• Employees and independent contractors: Restraints of two years or less are presumed reasonable. Restraints longer than two years are presumed unreasonable.
• Distributors, dealers, franchisees, lessees, and trademark licensees: Restraints of three years or less are presumed reasonable.
• Sellers of a business or equity interest: Restraints of five years or less—or equal to the duration of earn-out or seller payment periods, whichever is longer—are presumed reasonable.

These are rebuttable presumptions, meaning that an employer can still argue that a longer duration is reasonable under specific circumstances. Courts also retain the authority to modify (commonly referred to as “blue penciling”) an otherwise unreasonable restrictive covenant to render it enforceable rather than void it entirely.

The $70,000 Compensation Floor

One of the most important updates for many employers is the clear ban on non-compete agreements for employees earning less than $70,000 annually. This includes wages, salary, commissions, and nondiscretionary bonuses. For hourly workers, the annualized compensation is figured by multiplying the hourly rate by 40 hours per week, then by 52 weeks in a year. Non-compete agreements that violate the compensation threshold are void and unenforceable.

What Remains Enforceable

The new law does not affect the enforceability of confidentiality and nondisclosure agreements, client or customer non-solicitation agreements, or employee non-solicitation agreements. Employers will need to rely more heavily on these tools to protect business interests for employees who fall below the $70,000 compensation threshold. Violations will render noncompete agreements unenforceable.

How:

• Conduct a full inventory of all existing restrictive covenant agreements for Tennessee employees, noting the annualized compensation of each covered employee and the duration of any non-compete provisions.
• Identify any employees—current or newly hired after July 1, 2026—who earn less than $70,000 in annualized compensation.
• Update your standard non-compete templates so that the time restrictions fall within the allowed rebuttable presumption thresholds for each category.
• Train HR personnel and hiring managers on the new requirements.
• Consult employment counsel before renewing or amending any existing restrictive covenant agreement.

Additional Resources:

HB 1034

Illinois Expands and Clarifies Pay Transparency Requirements

Who: Illinois employers with 15 or more employees, including hybrid and remote workers with ties to Illinois

When: Effective immediately

On June 18, 2026, the Illinois Department of Labor adopted amendments to the administrative rules implementing pay transparency requirements under the Illinois Equal Pay Act of 2003. The underlying law took effect January 1, 2025, and already requires covered employers to disclose pay scale and benefits information and any promotional opportunities within 14 days of posting a job.

The new amendments finally define several terms that had been left open since 2025. “Benefits” now specifically includes:

• Health care benefits;
• Retirement benefits;
• Paid time off such as sick and parental leave;
• Vacation leave;
• Job-protected paid time off; and
• Anything else reportable for federal tax purposes.

“Pay scale and benefits” means the wage or salary (or range) plus a general description of benefits and other compensation. A “job posting” is defined as a written announcement that an employer is hiring for, or accepting applications for, a specific position.

The law applies to employers with 15 or more employees who post a position performed at least partly in Illinois, or performed outside Illinois but reporting to a supervisor, office, or worksite in the state, which describes many hybrid and remote arrangements.

Employers must now preserve documentation of the pay scale and benefits for every job posting and promotional opportunities communicated to employees for five years (longer if there’s an active investigation).

The amendments set a tiered civil penalty structure: $500 for a first offense (with a 14-day window to fix it), $2,500 for a second offense (7-day cure period), and $10,000 for a third offense, with no opportunity to cure.

How:

• Review all job posting procedures and compensation disclosures for compliance with the new definitions.
• Confirm your recordkeeping practices meet the five-year documentation requirement.
• Multistate employers with hybrid or remote workers should assess whether their postings now fall under Illinois’s expanded jurisdiction.

Additional Resources:

56 Ill. Adm. Code Part 320

820 ILCS 112 (Equal Pay Act of 2003)

Pay Transparency and Promotional Opportunity under the Illinois Equal Pay Act of 2003

Bloomington, Minnesota Repeals Local Earned Sick and Safe Time Ordinance

Who: Bloomington, Minnesota employers

When: Effective immediately

On April 27, 2026, the Bloomington City Council voted to repeal the city’s Earned Sick and Safe Time (ESST) Ordinance, effective immediately. The repeal was driven by the city’s determination that the statewide Minnesota ESST law, which has since been amended twice, now adequately provides the same protections the local ordinance was designed to guarantee. Bloomington is the second Minnesota city to take this step, following Duluth, which repealed its local ordinance effective January 18, 2024.

The city acknowledged that maintaining a parallel local ordinance had become administratively burdensome, requiring significant staff time to track, review, and update the local rules each time the state law was amended.

Employees in Bloomington do not lose their sick and safe time protections as a result of the repeal. Those protections are now governed exclusively by Minnesota’s statewide ESST law, which requires employers to provide one hour of sick and safe time for every 30 hours worked, up to a maximum of 40 hours per year. To be eligible, employees must work at least 80 hours per year and must not be classified as independent contractors.

Under the statewide law, employees may use accrued leave for:

• Their own or a family member’s mental or physical illness, treatment, or preventive care;
• Absences related to domestic abuse, sexual assault, or stalking of the employee or a family member;
• Closures of the workplace, school, or care facility due to weather or a public health emergency;
• Situations where a health authority has determined the employee or a family member poses a communicable disease risk; and
• Funeral arrangements, memorial attendance, or financial and legal matters following a family member’s death.

With Bloomington’s repeal, attention is turning to Minneapolis and Saint Paul—both of which also maintain local ESST ordinances that have drifted out of alignment with the evolving state law. Employers with Minnesota operations are watching closely to see whether those cities will follow suit.

How:

• Update your paid sick and safe leave policies to remove any references to the Bloomington ordinance and ensure they reflect the requirements of Minnesota’s statewide ESST law exclusively for employees working in Bloomington.
• Remove or revise any workplace postings, employee notices, handbook provisions, or other communications that specifically reference the now-repealed Bloomington ordinance.
• Align your notice, complaint, and recordkeeping procedures with the statewide framework, including directing employees to file any ESST-related complaints with the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry’s Labor Standards Division rather than with Bloomington.
• Watch for final rules from the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry regarding the statewide ESST law, which may provide additional interpretive guidance affecting compliance obligations.

Additional Resources:

An Ordinance Amending City Code Chapter 23 Relating to Earned Sick and Safe Time

City Council Meeting

Minnesota Department of Labor FAQs: Earned sick and safe time (ESST)

Bloomington Earned Sick and Safe Time (ESST)

Minnesota Department of Labor Earned Safe and Sick Time

Minnesota Releases Final Rules and FAQs for Earned Sick and Safe Time

Who: All Minnesota employers with at least one employee who works 80 hours annually, including part-time and temporary workers

When: Effective immediately

The Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry (DLI) has issued final rules implementing the state’s Earned Sick and Safe Time (ESST) law, effective July 6, 2026, along with a companion set of FAQs.

Any employer with at least one employee, including part-time and temporary workers who are anticipated to work at least 80 hours in a year in Minnesota. Covered employees accrue one hour of paid leave for every 30 hours worked, up to at least 48 hours per year, and can use ESST for qualifying reasons as soon as it’s accrued; there’s no waiting period.

The rules:

• Define what counts as an accrual year (and set a calendar-year default if an employer doesn’t clearly designate one);
• Address good-faith eligibility questions;
• Spell out hours-worked and credited-hours requirements;
• Cover accrual increments and payout at separation;
• Address frontloading;
• Set documentation standards;
• Define what counts as misuse of ESST;
• Address how the rules interact with employers that already offer more generous paid leave; and
• Clarify how ESST interacts with local sick-and-safe-time ordinances.

They implement and interpret the existing statute; they don’t change the underlying accrual rate or eligibility threshold.

DLI’s FAQs walk through many of the practical questions employers have been asking since the law took effect, and are worth reviewing alongside the rules themselves, especially on topics like accrual-year changes and rehire reinstatement.

How:

• Get familiar with the new ESST rules and FAQs.
• Update your employee handbooks and policies to reflect the new rules.
• Consult with legal counsel on any open compliance questions.

Additional Resources

Adopted ESST Rules

FAQs About Earned Sick and Safe Time Rules

Earned Sick and Safe Time (ESST)

Louisiana Adds Workplace Violence Protections

Who: Louisiana employers with employees in customer-facing retail, food-service, and hospitality roles who interact with customers at points of transaction

When: August 1, 2026

Louisiana has enacted a new law aimed at protecting customer-facing workers from violence on the job. Governor Jeff Landry signed the Louisiana Behind the Counter Protection Act (LBCPA), House Bill 1238/Act No. 342, on May 22, 2026, and the law takes effect August 1, 2026.

The LBCPA increases criminal penalties for people who commit acts of violence against covered employees while they’re on the job. A simple battery conviction against a covered employee can result in a $2,000 fine and up to two years in prison. A simple assault conviction can result in a $1,000 fine and up to six months in prison.

The law applies to employees working at checkout stations, service counters, drive-through windows, customer service desks, or similar customer-facing settings. This includes cashiers, bartenders, concierge agents, and some food servers.

Workplace violence is defined as any act of violence or credible threat of violence, including but not limited to:

• Assault;
• Battery;
• Robbery;
• Intimidation;
• Verbal abuse;
• Threats with a weapon; or
• Any conduct that places an employee in reasonable fear of physical harm or is directed at an employee while performing job duties at a covered establishment.

The LBCPA doesn’t impose any obligations on employers. It simply permits businesses to post a warning sign, in 48-point boldface font, stating that workplace violence against an employee is a crime and will not be tolerated. Signs are also available through Louisiana Works. Posting the LBCPA warning sign in the workplace isn’t required, but it may help deter violence and reassure customer-facing staff.

How:

• Consider posting the LBCPA warning sign at your premises.
• Review your workplace violence policies, reporting procedures, and training and update as needed.
• Educate employees on the LBCPA’s protections and penalties.

Additional Resources:

HB 1238 Behind the Counter Protection Act

Behind the Counter Act – Signage

New York City Expands Paid Sick and Safe Leave

Who: New York City employers

When: Effective February 22, 2026

New York City enacted Int. 780-A on October 25, 2025, which amends the New York City Earned Safe and Sick Time Act (ESSTA) beginning February 22, 2025. The current law requires employers with 100 or more employees to provide up to 56 hours of safe and sick leave per year, and employers with 99 or fewer employees to provide up to 40 hours of safe and sick leave per year. Employees accrue one hour of safe and sick leave for every 30 hours worked. Employers with fewer than four employees and a net income of less than $1 million in the previous year do not have to provide paid safe and sick leave.

Changes to ESSTA include:

• Expanded reasons employees can take safe and sick leave;
• Front-loaded, unpaid safe and sick leave;
• Additional hours of parental leave; and
• Elimination of most requirements under the Temporary Schedule Change Act (TSCA).

The amended law states that employees can now also use safe and sick leave when:

• There is a closure of a workplace, school, or childcare center due to a public disaster;
• A public official announces that people must stay indoors and avoid travel due to a public disaster;
• Caring for a minor child or care recipient;
• Obtaining services related to the employee or a covered family member being a victim of workplace violence; and
• Attending or preparing for legal proceedings for benefits or housing, or taking action to help restore or maintain benefits for themselves, a family member, or a care recipient.

Employers must provide an additional 32 hours of unpaid leave up front, which employees can use for any reason immediately upon accrual. The leave does not carry over to the following year.

In addition to paid and unpaid sick and safe time, employers must provide up to 20 hours of paid prenatal leave during any 52-week period, which employees can use in one-hour increments.

Employees may still request a temporary schedule change under TSCA, but employers do not have to approve the request.

How:

• Update your safe and sick leave policies.
• Train HR and other personnel who administer safe and sick leave.
• Review your policies related to temporary schedule change.
• Implement the new 32-hour unpaid leave bank.
• Post the updated notice of employee rights in the workplace and provide it to all employees.

Additional Resources:

780-A

Paid Safe and Sick Leave Law: Notice of Employee Rights

New York City Publishes New Sick and Safe Leave Notice and FAQ

Who: New York City employers

When: Effective immediately; notify employees by March 24, 2026

On February 19, 2026, the New York City Department of Consumer and Worker Protection released an updated New York City Notice of Employee Rights Protected Time Off Notice. The notice provides information about employees’ rights to sick and safe time and paid prenatal leave. Employers must post the notice in the workplace and distribute it to current employees and new hires by March 24, 2026. Employers must provide the notice in in English and in any language spoken as a primary language by at least 5% of employees at the workplace if translations are available on the DCWP website.

The city also published FAQs that provide guidance on the updates to the NYC Earned Sick and Safe Time Act (ESSTA), including information about covered uses, accrual for sick leave, and the addition of 32 hours of unpaid sick leave. The new unpaid sick leave went into effect on February 22, 2026, in compliance with an amendment to ESSTA.

When updating sick and safe leave policies, employers should remove any language related to the temporary schedule change (TSCA), which has been eliminated under the amended ESSTA.

How:

• Distribute the Notice of Employee Rights Protected Time Off Notice to all employees and post it in the workplace by March 24, 2026.
• Give the notice to all new employees upon hire.
• Update your safe and sick leave policies to comply with the new law.
• Train HR and other personnel who manage safe and sick leave.

Additional Resources:

780-A

Notice of Employee Rights: Protected Time Off

NYC Consumer and Worker Protection Protected Time Off Law

NYC Consumer and Worker Protection Protected Time Off Law: Frequently Asked Questions

NYC Finalizes "Protected Time Off" Rules Under Amended ESSTA

Who: New York City employers

When: Effective immediately

The New York City Department of Consumer and Worker Protection (DCWP) has finalized rules implementing amendments to the Earned Sick and Safe Time Act (ESSTA), replacing the term “safe/sick time” with “protected time off” throughout the law. The rules take effect July 23, 2026.

Employees must now receive 32 hours of unpaid protected time off immediately upon hire and again at the start of each calendar year that is available for a qualifying reason if an employee hasn’t yet accrued protected time off, has hit their annual cap, or simply needs to use unpaid leave on request. Employers are not required to roll over unused hours to the following year.

Employers must maintain a single written policy covering both protected time off and paid prenatal leave, and must distribute that policy to employees upon hire, within 14 days of any changes to it, and whenever an employee requests a copy. Pay statements need to separately track paid and unpaid protected time off in terms of what’s been used and what remains available.

Employers using electronic systems must either provide continuous access for six months, or, within a week of the employee’s last payday, issue a statement showing protected time off accrued and used during the pay period (noting whether it was paid or unpaid), the total balance, plus the same information for paid prenatal leave. For non-safe-time requests lasting more than three days, employers may request reasonable documentation. Employers must keep records for three years.

Failing to provide protected time off can result in the employer being required to pay the employee twice the annual maximum accrued hours plus a $500 penalty and 32 hours of unpaid protected time off. Paid parental leave violations carry an additional 20 hours of paid leave plus a $500 penalty.

How:

• Review all related practices, documentation, reimbursement, and record retention, to ensure alignment with the amended rules.
• Distribute policy updates to employees within 14 days.
• Ensure payroll, HRIS, and leave administration systems can provide 32 hours of unpaid leave immediately.
• Determine whether pay statements or electronic systems can distinguish between paid and unpaid protected time off.
• Train HR and any personnel who handle payroll or administer leave on the new requirements.

Additional Resources:

Notice of Adoption

Colorado Releases Proposed Rules for AI-Assisted Hiring and Chatbots

Who: Colorado employers

When: Deadline for comments to be considered for proposed revisions is September 4, 2026; all comments due before October 26, 2026

On August 11, 2026, Colorado regulators released proposed rules offering employers additional guidance on complying with the state’s Automated Decision-Making Technology (ADMT) Act. The rules address employers’ use of AI used in decisions about hiring, promotion, pay, discipline, and termination. They also set requirements for applicant and employee notices, meaningful human review, data correction, and recordkeeping.

ADMT is defined broadly: technology that processes personal data and uses computation to generate outputs — such as predictions, recommendations, classifications, rankings, or scores — that are used to make, guide, or assist decisions about individuals. The ADMT will take effect on January 1, 2027.

Colorado’s Conversational Artificial Intelligence Service Operator Requirements, known as the Chatbot Safety Act, was enacted July 1, 2026, and also takes effect January 1, 2027. It affects employers who use candidate-facing chatbots, and requires those services to implement age verification, transparency about AI use, protections for teens against sexually explicit content and simulated emotional dependence, other safeguards for minors, and compliance with reporting obligations.

How:

• Submit feedback on the draft manual by September 4, 2026, to be considered for the proposed revisions; all comments are due by October 26, 2026.
• Inventory all AI tools used in employment decisions.
• Review your human oversight process.
• Draft an adverse outcome notice.
• Send vendors written questions about how their tools work and what documentation they can provide.
• Continue to monitor for the final release of the rule.

Additional Resources:

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

Proposed Rules

Senate Bill 26-189

Colorado Adds New Notice Requirement to the I-9 Process

Who: All employers with employees or applicants in Colorado

When: Effective immediately

On June 3, 2026, Colorado Governor Jared Polis signed House Bill 26-1283 into law, “Protections Regarding Seizures of Identification Documents,” which restricts how employers may handle government-issued identification during hiring and adds a new written-notice requirement to the I-9 process, effective immediately.

Employers and their agents may not demand, confiscate, or improperly retain an applicant’s or employee’s government-issued identification, such as a driver’s license, passport, or work permit. This protection extends to migrant and seasonal workers as well.

The law doesn’t change federal Form I-9 obligations. Employers may still examine original identification documents and make copies as part of employment eligibility verification, but they may not hold the original document for more than 10 hours.

During the I-9 process, employers must provide a written notice explaining the protections under this law and obtain the individual’s signed acknowledgment. They must keep the acknowledgment in the employee’s records. Colorado has not published a model notice, so employers need to draft their own, in consultation with counsel.

Violations carry criminal penalties; the statute makes improper confiscation of identification documents a misdemeanor, and individuals whose documents are wrongfully taken may seek their immediate return and pursue civil damages.

How:

• Create a written notice that explains the law’s protections and includes space for employee acknowledgment.
• Incorporate the notice into your employment eligibility verification process.
• Train all hiring managers and HR personnel on the new requirements.
• Confirm that any third-party I-9 verification vendor complies with Colorado’s notice requirement.
• Consult legal counsel on notice language and implementation.

Additional Resources:

HB 26-1283

Colorado Replaces AI Act with Streamlined Automated Decision-Making Law

Who: Colorado employers

When: Effective January 1, 2027

Colorado Governor Jared Polis signed SB 26-189 on May 14, 2026, which repeals and replaces the Colorado AI Act (SB 24-205) just weeks before the original statute’s June 30, 2026, effective date. The new law takes effect January 1, 2027, making Colorado the first state to enact a comprehensive AI regulatory framework, though lawmakers substantially revised it from its original form.

The repealed Colorado AI Act imposed broad obligations on AI developers and deployers, including mandatory bias audits; risk impact assessments; extensive disclosure requirements; and an affirmative duty to prevent algorithmic discrimination. The new law eliminates those requirements in favor of a more targeted, transparency-based framework focused on automated decision-making technology used to materially influence consequential decisions.

A federal court issued a temporary restraining order blocking enforcement of the original Colorado AI Act on April 27, 2026, following a lawsuit by xAI (owned by Elon Musk) and a complaint filed by the U.S. Department of Justice. The passage of SB 26-189 supersedes the litigation’s immediate practical impact by replacing the law entirely.

Key Definitions

Automated Decision-Making Technology (ADMT): Any technology that processes personal data and uses computation to generate output used to make or assist a decision concerning an individual. ADMT excludes common infrastructure and security tools, tools used solely to summarize information for human review, and consumer-facing systems not intended for use in consequential decisions.

Consequential Decision: A decision affecting an individual’s access to or eligibility for education, employment, housing, financial or lending services, insurance, healthcare services, or essential government services. Low-stakes or routine processes—such as routine scheduling; administrative routing; customer service triage; workflow management; and advertising and marketing—are explicitly excluded, as are cybersecurity, anti-fraud, and sanctions compliance tools.

Covered ADMT: ADMT used to materially influence a consequential decision, meaning the ADMT output is a non-trivial factor that actually affects the outcome of that decision.

Consumer: Includes employees and job applicants who are Colorado residents.

Obligations Under the New Law

Developers must provide deployers with documentation covering the ADMT’s intended uses, categories of training data, known limitations, and instructions for appropriate use and human review. Developers must also notify deployers of material updates and retain records for at least three years.

Deployers must provide clear and conspicuous notice to consumers before using a covered ADMT in a consequential decision and include instructions on how to obtain additional information. Within 30 days of an adverse outcome, deployers must provide a plain-language description of the decision and the role of the ADMT, explain the consumer’s rights—including the right to access and correct inaccurate personal data—and offer an opportunity for meaningful human review and reconsideration to the extent commercially reasonable. Deployers must also retain compliance records for at least three years.

Risk management programs; impact assessments; ongoing monitoring requirements; and an affirmative duty of care do not apply under the new law—a significant reduction from the prior framework.

Liability and Enforcement

The law splits liability between developers and deployers based on their relative fault. Developers are not liable for downstream uses outside their documented intended uses; deployers remain responsible for their own actions and misuse. Contractual indemnification provisions that shift a party’s liability for its own ADMT-related discriminatory conduct are void because they are against public policy.

The Colorado Attorney General has exclusive enforcement authority. Violations constitute unfair and deceptive trade practices. Prior to initiating enforcement, the Attorney General must provide a 60-day notice and opportunity to cure (where a cure is deemed possible). There is no private right of action. The Attorney General must create implementation regulations before January 1, 2027.

How:

• Identify every AI tool or system your organization uses that could qualify as covered ADMT—particularly any technology involved in hiring, screening, performance evaluation, compensation, or benefits decisions affecting Colorado workers.
• Engage your AI vendors now to obtain documentation on intended uses, training data categories, known limitations, and human review guidance, as developers must provide this information under the new law.
• Create a clear and conspicuous notice process to inform employees, applicants, and other individuals when you are using a covered ADMT in a consequential decision that affects them.
• Develop a post–adverse outcome disclosure workflow to deliver plain-language explanations to affected individuals within the 30-day window required by law.
• Update policies for compliance and ensure that developers and deployers keep related compliance records for three years.
• Monitor the Colorado Attorney General’s implementing regulations, expected before January 1, 2027, for additional specificity on disclosure content, format, and consumer rights procedures.

Additional Resources:

SB 26-189 (Automated Decision-Making Technology)

Due Feb. 28: Annual CDTFA Hazardous Waste Fees Calculation

Some California Dealers May Need to Pay CDTFA Fees by February 28, 2026

The U.S. Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) provides the California Department of Taxes and Fee Association (CDTFA) with data from your organization that includes, but isn’t limited to, Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes and hazardous waste generation tonnage. This determines if you’re required to pay certain fees through the CDTFA portal. In some cases, you may be required to participate in specific business activities and will need to manually add these activities to your CDTFA portal. Below are common fees that your organization may incur — unless you’re exempt from them.

Occupational Lead Fee

Many California dealerships are exempt from the state’s Occupational Lead Fee. However, if you see this fee in your portal to file, but your SIC code isn’t part of the Applicable Industry List, you may be registered under an incorrect SIC code within the CDTFA portal. You’ll need to correct this as part of your 2026 fee filing. If you’re uncertain of your organization’s SIC code, use the U.S. Department of Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s System Search.

Valid exemptions include:

• Facilities with 10 or fewer employees, even if they’re part of a listed industry.
• New car dealers, collision centers, and quick lube service facilities that have one of these exact SIC codes are excluded from this fee.
• 5511(New Car Dealer)
• 7532 (Collision Repair)
• 7549 (Lube Service Without Repair)
• Businesses with de minimus amounts of lead use in their business can also request a waiver. See the California Department of Public Health’s FAQs.

Environmental Fee

Applicable California businesses must file the Environmental Fee if they generate, store, or conduct activities in California related to hazardous materials AND meet the required employee count threshold. It’s up to your organization to determine its employee count and add it as a business activity prior to the February 2026 deadline.

• Do you meet the required employee count? Yes, if you had 100 or more employees who worked more than 500 hours in the 2025 calendar year (January 1-December 31).
• Are you exempt? Check if your facility is exempt and view the latest fee schedules at California’s Department of Toxic Substances Control website.

Generator & Handling Fee

California’s Generator and Handling Fee applies to generators of hazardous waste that create 5 tons or more of such waste in a calendar year. Prior to 2021, used oil was exempt from this reporting, which made very few generators subject to the fee.

Now, you calculate the total tonnage that your facility generated, including used oil, and if it’s over 5 tons, you must report the tonnage in a pre-payment due November 28, 2025, and a final payment that’s due February 28, 2026. The tonnage you report includes manifested and consolidated hazardous wastes generated in the calendar year of 2024. You can review exempted wastes, such as universal waste, here.

How KPA Can Help You

If you’re a KPA client, your KPA Consultant can help answer your questions and walk you through the applicable fees you may need to pay into the CDTFA portal. The state should also be issuing updated FAQs and other guidance soon at: https://dtsc.ca.gov/fees.

California Proposition 65: Welding Fumes Now Listed

What: California has added welding fumes to the Proposition 65 list of chemicals
known to cause cancer. The new listing applies to businesses and employers that may
expose employees, customers, or other individuals to welding fumes.

Who: This update is especially relevant to auto dealerships, service shops, collision
centers, and other automotive repair facilities that perform welding.

When: The welding-fumes listing became effective July 17, 2026. Businesses generally
have until July 17, 2027, to comply with the Proposition 65 warning requirement for this
newly listed chemical.

Where: Auto repair facilities should evaluate welding areas, repair bays, and locations
where welding fumes could potentially migrate.

Why: Welding fumes are now recognized under California Proposition 65 as a cancer
hazard. Businesses should ensure that appropriate warnings are provided where
required and continue to control employee exposure in accordance with applicable
workplace safety requirements.

How:
1. Review welding operations and exposure controls.
Identify where welding occurs, what materials are being welded, and who may be
exposed. Evaluate welding practices and work areas to ensure employees are
protected from welding fumes. Confirm that local exhaust ventilation, fume extraction,
work practices, and respiratory protection are appropriate for the welding operations
being performed.

2. Review your Proposition 65 warning signage.
California provides specific warning provisions for vehicle repair facilities. Verify that the
appropriate warning is posted at required public entrances and meets the applicable
formatting, language, and placement requirements.

3. Consider existing listed chemicals.
Welding fumes may contain chemicals that were already subject to Proposition 65
requirements, such as certain chromium, lead, or cadmium compounds. The July 17,
2027, compliance date for welding fumes does not eliminate existing obligations for
those chemicals.

California Combating Auto Retail Scams (CARS) Act Signed by Governor

The California Legislature has passed Senate Bill 766, the California Combating Auto Retail Scams (CARS) Act, and Governor Newsom has signed it.

The New California CARS Act is scheduled to take effect on October 1, 2026, giving you just 12 months to prepare for the most comprehensive auto retail compliance law in the nation. If you’re a California dealer or if you sell vehicles to California consumers from out-of-state, full compliance is mandatory.

The Executive Risk: Penalties and Personal Liability

When the FTC previously pursued deceptive auto sales practices, it sought penalties and consumer redress not only against the dealership entities but also against individual owners, executives, and employees.

The California CARS Act provides new grounds for the California Attorney General and District Attorneys to do the same, leveraging the state’s Unfair Competition Law to seek:

• Significant Civil Penalties (thousands of dollars per violation).
• Targeted Enforcement against the individuals who directed or carried out illegal practices.

Your compliance gap is not just a business risk—it is a personal risk to your career and finances.

CARS Act’s Core Requirements:

The CARS Act mandates strict consumer protections, including:

• Total Price Disclosure: Required in ALL advertisements and first written communications. This must be the full, final price a consumer can pay, excluding only taxes and governmental fees.
• Total Cost of Ownership: Clear, conspicuous disclosure of the total amount a consumer will pay over the life of a financed transaction.
• 3-Day Right to Cancel: A new right for used-car buyers (for vehicles under $50,000) to return the vehicle for any reason, subject to strict mileage and condition limits.
• Ban on Valueless Add-Ons: Prohibits charging for products that provide no benefit to the vehicle or the buyer (e.g., oil changes for an EV).
• Comprehensive Record-Keeping: Dealers must retain all records (ads, communications, contracts, and cancellations) to demonstrate compliance for at least two years.

The Out-of-State Trap:

Think your out-of-state location makes you safe? Think again.

If you actively market to or sell vehicles to California residents, you risk establishing personal jurisdiction with the state, making you fully subject to this law.

California Publishes Model Workplace Know Your Rights Notice

Who: California employers

When: Notice requirement effective immediately; emergency contact requirement effective March 30, 2026

The California Labor Commissioner published the model notice for the Workplace Know Your Rights Act, which took effect on January 1, 2026. Beginning February 1, 2026, employers must provide a stand-alone written notice of worker rights annually to each employee and to new employees upon hire. They may send the notice via one of several methods, including email or text, if they can reasonably anticipate the employee will receive it within one business day. The notice must be in the language the employer normally uses to communicate employment-related information to the employee and that the employee understands.

The model notice is available in English and Spanish, and the Commissioner will release it in additional languages in the future. The Commissioner will update the notice annually.

In addition, employers have until March 30, 2026, to provide existing workers and new employees upon hire the opportunity to designate an emergency contact. In so doing, they authorize the employer to notify the emergency contact if they are arrested or detained at the worksite or while performing job duties away from the worksite.

Employers must maintain records of providing the notice for up to three years, including the dates they sent the notice to employees.

How:

• Provide the new California Workplace Know Your Rights Notice to all current employees by February 1, 2026, and to all new hires upon hire.
• Give employees the opportunity to designate an emergency contact in time for them to submit it by March 30, 2026, and to new hires thereafter.
• Create a protocol to contact designated persons in the event of employee detainment and train managers and supervisors on the protocol.

Additional Resources:

SB 294

California Workplace – Know Your Rights Notice English

California Workplace – Know Your Rights Notice Spanish

California Releases New Paid Sick Leave Poster

Who: California employers

When: Effective immediately

The California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement released an updated Healthy Workplaces/Healthy Families Act paid sick leave poster. It includes the requirements of AB 2499 (Employment: unlawful discrimination and paid sick days: victims of violence), which amended employee leave rights, and AB 406 (Employment: unlawful discrimination: victims of violence), which made technical changes to the state paid sick leave statute.

In addition to the existing allowable reasons to take the leave, the amended law allows employees to also take paid sick leave to:

• Serve on a jury;
• Appear in court to comply with a subpoena or other court order as a witness in a judicial proceeding;
• Obtain relief to ensure their health, safety, or welfare, or that of a child after being subjected to a qualifying act of violence;
• Attend judicial proceedings related to the employee and/or their family members being victims of a violent or serious crime; or
• Obtain victim-related treatment and services (if the employee works for an employer with 25 or more employees).

Employers may not retaliate against employees who request sick leave under the law.

How:

• Post the January 2026 paid sick leave poster in the workplace.
• Review your sick leave policies and update them as needed.
• Train HR personnel and supervisors on how to properly handle qualified requests for sick leave.

Additional Resources:

AB 2499

AB 406

Healthy Workplaces/Healthy Families Act: California Paid Sick Leave (as amended effective 1/1/2026) Poster English

Healthy Workplaces/Healthy Families Act: California Paid Sick Leave (as amended effective 1/1/2026) Poster Spanish

California Paid Sick Leave: Frequently Asked Questions

California Governor Issues Executive Order on AI Procurement Standards

Who: California employers

When: Effective immediately; most employer actions must be taken by July 28, 2026

California Governor Gavin Newsom signed Executive Order N-5-26 on March 30, 2026, directing state agencies to establish new artificial intelligence (AI) vendor certification requirements and reshape the state’s procurement processes for AI technologies. The Order builds on an earlier Executive Order, N-12-23, issued in September 2023, which provided general guidance on how California would evaluate and use generative AI in state operations. The new Order adds a procurement-focused layer and responds directly to recent federal AI deregulation efforts.

While the Order does not carry the force of law and does not impose immediately binding obligations on private companies, it sets in motion a process that could result in significant new requirements for vendors seeking state contracts. As the Order itself notes, public procurement is “one of the most powerful tools available to governments to shape market behavior and encourage responsible innovation.” California standards established for state vendors today frequently become benchmarks—and, in time, legal requirements—for the private sector more broadly.

Five Key Provisions

Most directives in the Order carry a 120-day deadline from the date of signing, making late July 2026 the anticipated window for agency recommendations.

• Vendor Certification Requirements. The Department of General Services (DGS) and the California Department of Technology (CDT) must develop certification criteria for vendors seeking state contracts. Vendors will be required to attest to and explain their policies and safeguards related to:
• Prevention of illegal content exploitation (such as non-consensual intimate imagery and child sexual abuse material);
• Avoidance of harmful bias in AI models; and
• Protection of civil rights and civil liberties, including free speech, voting rights, and freedom from unlawful surveillance and discrimination.
• Independent Review of Federal Supply Chain Risk Designations. The CDT’s State Chief Information Security Officer (CISO) is directed to independently assess federal supply chain risk designations of AI companies on an ongoing basis. If the CISO determines that a federal designation is improper, they will issue guidance to help state agencies continue to procure from the flagged company. This provision is notable given the February 2026 Pentagon designation of Anthropic as a supply chain risk—the first time such a designation was applied to an American AI company.
• Contractor Responsibility Reforms. Within 120 days, the Government Operations Agency (GovOps) must recommend reforms to contractor responsibility provisions, including suspension and ineligibility procedures, to prevent the state from contracting with entities judicially determined to have unlawfully undermined privacy or civil liberties.
• Expanded Generative AI Use in Government Operations. GovOps and partner agencies must:
• Facilitate state employee access to vetted generative AI tools with privacy and cybersecurity safeguards;
• Share best practices on responsible AI procurement;
• Update the state digital strategy to identify generative AI use cases;
• Pilot a public-facing AI-enabled service platform;
• Expand AI-related workforce training; and
• Publish a data minimization toolkit for departments and agencies.
• AI Watermarking Guidance. CDT and GovOps must issue guidance on best practices for watermarking AI-generated or significantly manipulated images and video, consistent with existing California law.

The Order applies to all vendors seeking to do business with California state agencies—not solely AI companies—for the certification and procurement provisions. It is forward-looking and does not direct agencies to re-evaluate existing contracts.

How:

• If your organization contracts with the State of California or anticipates doing so, evaluate your current AI-related policies and safeguards in the three priority areas—content safety, bias mitigation, and civil rights protections—and begin preparing for potential new attestation requirements.
• Monitor for agency recommendations expected from DGS and CDT in late July 2026. These will provide the specific templates and requirements for vendor certification.
• Audit your AI tools for bias and establish internal governance policies, training programs, and reporting procedures to protect against unlawful discrimination, privacy violations, and free speech concerns.
• Stay current on California’s AI Watermarking guidance, expected within 120 days of the Order, as these standards may eventually influence corporate communications practices more broadly.
• Track the parallel federal AI laws, which have moved in the direction of deregulation and created potentially conflicting compliance obligations for organizations that operate in both state and federal markets.

Additional Resources:

Executive Order N-5-26

California Expands AI Transparency Act Obligations Under AB 853

Who: California covered providers of generative AI systems, as well as certain AI hosting platforms, large online platforms, and capture device manufacturers.

When: Effective August 2, 2026

On October 13, 2025, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed AB 853, which amends the California AI Transparency Act (CAITA). The original law, enacted in 2024 through SB 942, requires certain generative AI (GenAI) providers to label AI-generated content. AB 853 pushes back CAITA’s compliance deadline from January 1, 2026, to August 2, 2026, and adds new categories of businesses that must comply.

CAITA originally covers “covered providers,” which is anyone who creates or produces a GenAI system with more than one million monthly visitors or users publicly accessible in California. These providers must offer a free public AI-detection tool, and they must label AI-generated image, video, or audio content with both a visible disclosure and a hidden, embedded one.

AB 853 adds three new groups. Starting January 1, 2027, large online platforms—meaning social media, file-sharing sites, mass messaging apps, and search engines—with more than two million unique monthly users must check content for AI-provenance data, show users whether that data exists, and let them inspect it.

Also starting January 1, 2027, platforms that let people download GenAI source code or model weights can’t knowingly offer a system for download unless it already includes CAITA’s required disclosures.

Starting January 1, 2028, manufacturers of cameras, phones, and other recording devices sold in California must let users add a hidden disclosure to content they capture and must turn that feature on by default.

The California Attorney General, a city attorney, or a county counsel enforces the law. Violations cost $5,000 each. Every day a business stays out of compliance counts as a separate violation.

How:

• Determine which category under AB 853 applies to your business, comply with the corresponding disclosure obligations and legal requirements.

Additional Resources:

AB 853 (Delay the Operation of the California AI Transparency Act until August 2, 2026)

SB 942 (Delayed from January 1, 2026)

California Executive Order Targets AI's Impact on the Workforce

Who: California state agencies

When: Effective October 15, 2026

On May 21, 2026, Governor Gavin Newsom signed Executive Order N-6-26, which directs state agencies to study and help offset AI’s impact on California’s workforce and to support displaced workers through research, measures, and policies. The order applies to state agencies, not private employers, but it sets in motion several initiatives employers will want to watch.

Within 90 days, the Employment Development Department (EDD) must launch a dashboard tracking AI’s impact on employment by sector, using unemployment insurance data. The EDD is also gathering feedback from businesses about how technology adoption is shaping hiring and workforce decisions.

Within 180 days, the Labor and Workforce Development Agency (LWDA) has four tasks:

• Recommend updates to the California Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act;
• Review policies that support displaced workers (including severance and equity compensation);
• Create a plan to expand awareness of and enrollment in employment insurance programs; and
• Suggest ways to connect unemployed workers with training and opportunities to ugrade skills.

By October 15, 2026, LWDA must also review how collective bargaining agreements are addressing AI — including how workers’ input factors into new technology adoption — and evaluate whether existing workforce training programs remain effective.

How:

• Monitor LWDA’s 180-day WARN Act review.
• Inventory internal AI tools used in employment decisions and document how you are using them.
• Track recommendations on severance and equity policies as they develop.

Additional Resources:

Executive Order N-6-26

DOL Announces New Federal Contractor Minimum Wage

Who: Federal contractors

When: Effective May 11, 2026

The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) announced new federal contractor minimum wage rates. Beginning May 11, 2026, the minimum wage for covered contractors will increase from $13.30 to $13.65 per hour for non-tipped employees and from $9.30 to $9.55 per hour for tipped employees.

President Obama’s Executive Order 13658 applies to:

• Contracts entered into from January 1, 2015, to January 30, 2022;
• Contracts not extended beyond January 29, 2022; and
• Contracts subject to the Davis-Bacon Act or Service Contract Act.

President Trump rescinded Biden’s Executive Order 14026, which covered contracts entered into on or after January 30, 2022, so it is no longer in effect. The number of contracts subject to Executive Order 13658 has significantly decreased since its release, but there are still some existing contracts in effect.

How:

• Update your covered federal contracts with the new minimum wage.
• Review your pay practices to ensure compliance with applicable federal prevailing wage laws, as well as state, and local laws, including contractual obligations.
• Monitor for updates and changes that impact federal contractors.
• Monitor for the release of the updated federal contractor minimum wage poster and display it in the workplace.
• Seek legal counsel as needed to ensure compliance.

Additional Resources:

Minimum Wage for Federal Contracts Covered by Executive Order 13658, Notice of Rate Change in Effect

Executive Order 13658, Establishing a Minimum Wage for Contractors: Annual Update

DOL Releases Make America AI-Ready Literacy Course

Who: All employers

When: Effective immediately

On March 24, 2026, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) launched a free course called “Make America AI-Ready.” The purpose is to equip Americans with foundational AI skills outlined in America’s Talent Strategy and the White House’s AI Action Plan, making it accessible to all Americans. Learners can access the course by texting READY to 20202 or signing up on a desktop computer.

The Make America AI-Ready course is part of the Trump administration’s AI Action Plan and aligns with the DOL’s AI Literacy Framework. It offers bite-sized learning modules sent by text message that participants can complete in 10 minutes a day over seven days. Topics include:

• Understanding AI principles;
• Exploring AI uses;
• Directing AI effectively;
• Evaluating AI outputs; and
• Using AI responsibly.

How:

• Notify employees about the Make America AI-Ready course.

Additional Resources:

An Initiative by the U.S. Department of Labor Make America AI-Ready

America’s Talent Strategy

AI Action Plan

AI Literacy Framework

Desktop AI 101

DOL Proposes Higher Wage Floors for Certain Foreign Workers

Who: Employers that sponsor foreign workers

When: Submit comments by May 26, 2026

On March 27, 2026, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) proposed a rule in the Federal Register titled, “Improving Wage Protections for the Temporary and Permanent Employment of Certain Foreign Nationals” in the United States. The proposed rule would increase the prevailing wage for permanent labor certification, H-1B, H-1B1, and E-3 visa programs. Employers must pay sponsored employees the higher of the prevailing wage the actual wage paid to similarly qualified U.S. workers in the area of intended employment.

The purpose of the rule is to bring the wages paid to foreign workers in line with wages paid to American workers in similar positions so as to reduce the incentive to replace American workers with foreign workers.

The proposed rule would force employers to use the Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS) survey to determine wage levels or private wage surveys and other alternative wage survey data as an alternative to DOL wages. The proposed wage levels are set at percentiles of the OEWS wage data:

• Level I: entry-level, 34th percentile;
• Level II: qualified, 52nd percentile;
• Level III: experienced, 70th percentile; and
• Level IV: advanced, 88th percentile.

The public may comment on the proposed rule until May 26, 2026. Once published, the final rule will state the effective date and be applicable to new and pending wage determinations.

How:

• Submit your comments on the proposed legislation by May 26, 2026.
• Consider reviewing your job descriptions for visa positions to identify which ones may be impacted.
• Plan for wage increases for affected employees.
• Consult with a legal immigration attorney to identify which employees will be impacted.

Additional Resources:

Improving Wage Protections for the Temporary and Permanent Employment of Certain Foreign Nationals in the United States

DOL Proposes New Joint Employer Rule

Who: All employers with contractors, franchisors, or staffing agencies

When: Submit comments by June 22, 2026

On April 22, 2026, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) published a proposed joint employer rule titled, “Joint Employer Status Under the Fair Labor Standards Act, Family and Medical Leave Act, and Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act.” The purpose is to revise the definition of joint employer status under three federal wage and hour laws, thereby reducing the cost of compliance, increasing the DOL’s ability to enforce the law, and help workers understand their rights under the law.

The proposed rule sets standards for determining joint employer status in horizontal and vertical joint employment situations. Vertical employment is defined as “jointly employed by two or more employers that simultaneously benefit from the employee’s work.” The four-factor test allows employers to determine how much control the business has over another entity’s employees. The factors include whether the joint employer:

• Hires or fires the employee;
• Supervises and controls the employee’s work schedule or conditions of employment to a substantial degree;
• Determines the employee’s rate and method of payment; and
• Maintains the employee’s employment records.

The proposed rule states that no single factor is dispositive in determining joint employer status and that the determination depends on all the facts in a particular case.

Horizontal joint employment is defined as “a situation where an employee works separate hours for two or more joint employers in the same workweek, and the employers are sufficiently associated with each other with respect to the employment of the employee that they are joint employers.” Two employers are sufficiently associated if:

• There is an arrangement between them to share the employee’s services;
• One employer is acting directly or indirectly in the interests of the other employer in relation to the employee; and
• They share control of the employee, directly or indirectly, by reason of the fact that one employer controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with the other employer.

The existence of a business relationship between two employers—such as sharing a vendor or being franchisees of the same franchisor—does not automatically mean they are joint employers.

The National Labor Relations Board published a final joint employer rule in February 2026 that applies only to collective bargaining rights and unfair labor practices. That rule makes it more difficult for businesses to be held jointly liable for alleged labor law violations by staffing companies, contractors, franchisees, and other related organizations.

How:

• Submit comments on the proposed rule by June 22, 2026.
• Review your contracts, franchise agreements, and vendor agreements to determine whether you could be considered a joint employer.
• Familiarize yourself with state and jurisdictional joint employer rules.
• Continue to monitor rulemaking on the proposed law.

Additional Resources:

Joint Employer Status Under the Fair Labor Standards Act, Family and Medical Leave Act, and Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act

Questions and Answers – NPRM: Joint Employer Status Under the FLSA, FMLA, and MSPA

DOL Rescinds 2024 Overtime Rule, Restoring 2019 Salary Thresholds

Who: Employers subject to the Fair Labor Standards Act

When: Effective immediately

The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) has issued a technical amendment that formally rescinds the 2024 overtime rule and restores the salary thresholds established under the 2019 rule. The rescission follows two federal court rulings in Texas that vacated the 2024 rule on a nationwide basis and a U.S. Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit dismissal of the final appeal on May 5, 2026. The technical amendment was published in the Federal Register on May 15, 2026, and is effective immediately.

The Biden administration’s 2024 rule would have raised the standard salary threshold for executive, administrative, and professional (EAP) employees from $684 per week to $844 per week as of July 1, 2024, and further to $1,128 per week as of January 1, 2025. The 2024 rule would also have increased the highly compensated employee (HCE) threshold to $151,164 per year and added automatic triennial updates. None of those increases will take effect.

With the technical amendment now in place, the following thresholds have been restored and are currently in force:

• Standard executive, administrative, and professional (EAP) exemption: $684 per week ($35,568 annually)
• Highly compensated employee exemption: $107,432 annually
• Certain computer employee hourly exemption: $27.63 per hour

The DOL’s action does not create new policy. It removes the invalidated 2024 regulatory language from the Code of Federal Regulations and reinstates the prior version. Because the Wage and Hour Division has been enforcing the 2019 thresholds since the courts vacated the 2024 rule, the practical impact for most employers is largely one of formal confirmation. The automatic triennial update mechanism included in the 2024 rule is also eliminated.

Employers should bear in mind that salary level alone does not determine exempt status. Employees must satisfy both the salary basis and level test and the applicable duties test to qualify for a white-collar exemption. Additionally, a number of states impose higher salary minimums for exemption purposes, and those state law requirements remain in force regardless of the federal action.

How:

• Review all currently exempt EAP and HCE classifications to confirm that salary levels and duties tests align with the reinstated 2019 federal thresholds.
• Identify any employees whose salaries were raised solely to comply with the now-rescinded 2024 thresholds.
• Verify whether your state imposes a higher salary threshold for exemption purposes, and ensure your classifications comply with the stricter of the applicable federal or state standards.
• Confirm that exempt employees satisfy not only the salary level test but also the salary basis requirement and the relevant duties test under the FLSA.
• Direct employees or managers with compliance questions to the DOL Wage and Hour Division helpline at 866-4US-WAGE (487-9243).
• Consult employment counsel if you are uncertain whether any reclassification decisions or salary adjustments are appropriate as they apply to your specific workforce.

Additional Resources:

Final Rule

Technical Amendment Docket No. WHD-2026-010

U.S. Department of Labor Compliance Assistance

DOL Issues Four New Opinion Letters on Wage and Hour Compliance

Who: All employers

When: Effective immediately

On May 28, 2026, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) Wage and Hour Division released four opinion letters interpreting federal wage and hour requirements under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Opinion letters are formal responses to specific factual scenarios submitted to the agency. While they are not legally binding, they can be useful to employers when defending an employee-challenged practice in court. The guidance in these letters interprets the FLSA and does not affect any state or local wage and hour laws that impose stricter requirements.

Opinion letter FLSA2026-5 addresses whether an employee who works in both an exempt position and a separate non-exempt hourly role can retain exempt status. The DOL found that the employee is exempt as long as the employee’s primary duty remains in the exempt position, even if the employee occasionally works substantial hours in a non-exempt role. Employers may pay such employees hourly for the supplemental non-exempt work without violating the salary-basis requirement.

Opinion letter FLSA2026-6 addresses whether calculating each employee’s bonus based on the group’s total straight-time and overtime pay count as a “percentage of total earnings” bonus? And if so, does the employer still have to go back and recalculate the regular rate and pay extra overtime on top of the bonus? The DOL said yes to the first question and no to the second question. Because the bonus formula is already tied to actual hours-based pay (including OT), it already reflects the overtime math, so there’s nothing left to recalculate. Caveat: This is true as long as the bonus formula excludes amounts such as gifts, discretionary bonuses, and benefit contributions.

Opinion letter FLSA2026-7 addresses whether time an employee spends traveling off-premises during an unpaid meal break is compensable. The DOL concluded that it is not, provided the employer fully relieves the employee of their duties during the break. An employee’s voluntary decision to leave the premises during the break does not convert travel time into compensable work. Employers may require employees to remain on the premises for a 30-minute or longer unpaid meal period.

Opinion letter FLSA2026-8 discusses a hospital’s timekeeping practices, including unpaid pre-shift activities, time-clock rounding, and the treatment of short periods as de minimis. The DOL noted that pre-shift work ,such as receiving patient handoffs, is integral and indispensable to the job and is therefore compensable, while time spent waiting in line to clock in or out generally is not. Rounding practices are lawful only if , in the aggregate, they do not favor the employer over the employee. The DOL cautioned that timekeeping systems capable of recording exact times make it more difficult to treat work that an employee performs regularly as de minimis.

How:

• Review the opinion letters and update your wage and hour policies as needed.
• Audit your pre-shift timekeeping and rounding practices for accuracy.
• Confirm that you are in compliance with applicable state and local wage and hour laws.

Additional Resources

U.S. Department of Labor Wage and Hour Division

U.S. Department of Labor Office of the Assistant Secretary for Policy Opinion Letters

BLS Proposes New AI Questions for the American Time Use Survey

Who: All employers

When: Public comments due September 8, 2026

The U.S. Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) has proposed adding new questions about artificial intelligence to the American Time Use Survey (ATUS). The proposal was published in the Federal Register on July 10, 2026, and is open for public comment through September 8, 2026.

The federal survey currently links an individual’s AI use to a detailed record of their daily activities. By pairing new AI questions with the ATUS time diary, BLS wants to understand when, how, and for what tasks people use AI tools, at work, in school, at home, and during leisure time.

ATUS is a voluntary survey of individuals, not a government reporting requirement placed on businesses. Employers have no reporting or recordkeeping duties tied to this proposal.

The resulting data could shape how policymakers, researchers, and even employers themselves think about AI adoption, its effect on job tasks and productivity, and the skills workers need going forward. It is also a reminder that governments are paying close attention to how AI is used in the workplace, which makes it a good time for employers to make sure their internal AI policies are solid.

If approved, BLS plans to begin asking the new questions in January 2027 for a two-year period, allowing the agency to capture early patterns of AI adoption during this period of rapid change. Comments on the proposal can be submitted through the Federal Register docket or sent directly to the BLS Clearance Officer.

How:

• Make sure your existing AI policies address confidentiality, data security, accuracy, human review, and ongoing monitoring of AI use.
• Submit public comments to BLS_PRA_Public@bls.gov before September 8, 2026, if your organization wants to weigh in.
• Stay informed as BLS finalizes the survey questions and rollout timeline.

Additional Resources

Proposed Information Collection; ATUS Artificial Intelligence (AI) Questions

DOL Opinion Letters Clarify Pay for Commuting and Remote Work

Who: All employers with non-exempt employees who split time between home and a worksite, or who receive work assignments remotely

When: Effective immediately

On July 22, 2026, the U.S. Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division released two opinion letters addressing how the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) treats commuting and pre-shift activities for employees who work part of their day from home. Opinion letters aren’t legally binding, but they show how the DOL would view similar facts if a dispute arises, so they’re a useful compliance reference.

In FLSA2026-9, the DOL considered an employer that wanted to let non-exempt employees split their workday between home and the office, for example, working an early shift at home to avoid rush hour and then driving in. The DOL concluded that this kind of midday travel is still an ordinary commute and is not compensable, provided the arrangement is voluntary and primarily benefits the employee. The DOL was careful to note this doesn’t change existing rules: Travel between two different worksites during the day is still compensable, and any work an employee performs during the commute is compensable.

In FLSA2026-10, the DOL looked at an engineer who received service calls electronically at home and coordinated with clients before driving to the first appointment. The DOL drew a line here: Simply receiving an assignment electronically is not compensable, but time spent on the phone scheduling and coordinating with clients or coworkers is compensable, because that work is integral to the job and primarily benefits the employer. That coordination time can also affect whether the subsequent drive still counts as an ordinary commute.

Both letters use a “primary beneficiary” test: Time that mainly benefits the employee (like choosing a flexible commute time) generally isn’t paid time, while time that mainly benefits the employer (like coordinating client work) generally is. Employers offering flexible or hybrid schedules should look closely at how the fact patterns in these letters compare with their own practices.

How:

• Put clear written policies in place covering flexible and split-schedule work arrangements.
• Require non-exempt employees to track all work time, including any coordination or work-related calls that happen outside normal commuting.
• Consider auditing current timekeeping and pay practices against the scenarios described in the opinion letters.
• Review other related Department of Labor resources on compensable travel time.
• Consult with legal counsel before changing pay practices based on these letters.

Additional Resources

DOL Opinion Letter FLSA2026-9

DOL Opinion Letter FLSA2026-10

EEOC Rescinds Decades-Old Affirmative Action Guidelines

Who: All employers, particularly those with voluntary affirmative action plans

When: Effective immediately

On June 30, 2026, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) announced that it rescinded two long-standing policy documents that guided voluntary affirmative action plans under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: the interpretive guidelines “Affirmative Action Appropriate under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as Amended” under 29 C.F.R. Part 1608, and Section 607 of the EEOC’s Compliance Manual. Both had been in place for roughly 40 years. The final rule went into effect on July 6, 2026.

They served as a roadmap for employers seeking to adopt voluntary affirmative action plans and as a framework for demonstrating that a plan was reasonable and defensible if challenged. Employers have relied on them for decades when structuring diversity-related hiring and promotion initiatives.

The rescission doesn’t amend the statute, eliminate the ability to bring a discrimination claim, or overrule existing Supreme Court precedent. Rulings such as United Steelworkers v. Weber and Johnson v. Transportation Agency, which upheld certain voluntary affirmative action plans, remain binding law. What has changed is the EEOC’s interpretive framework, and, with it, the safe harbor that employers used to cite when defending their plans.

The Commission says the guidelines:

• Were inconsistent with the plain text of Title VII;
• Weren’t supported by Supreme Court precedent when first issued;
• Applied only to plans benefiting women and minorities; and
• Hadn’t kept pace with decades of subsequent case law.

This action lines up with the broader federal push to move away from DEI programs and toward strictly merit-based employment decisions. The EEOC operates under the principle that when making employment decisions, employers should not consider an applicant’s or employee’s protected characteristics unless permitted by law.

Because the good-faith defense tied to the old guidelines is no longer available, employers with voluntary affirmative action plans should take a fresh look at how those plans are structured and documented.

How:

• Review all hiring, promotion, compensation, and diversity-related initiatives.
• Audit existing policies, agreements, programs, and practices with legal counsel.
• Continue monitoring federal and state law in this area.

Additional Resources

Rescission of Guidelines on Affirmative Action Appropriate Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as Amended

EEOC Votes to Rescind Affirmative Action Interpretive Guidelines and Related Compliance Manual

EEOC Adopts Enforcement Plan Prioritizing Intentional Discrimination

Who: All employers

When: Effective immediately

On June 4, 2026, the EEOC voted to replace the Biden administration’s Fiscal Year 2024–2028 Strategic Enforcement Plan with the National Enforcement Plan (NEP) for Fiscal Years 2025–2029. The NEP sets the agency’s subject-matter priorities across outreach, technical assistance, enforcement, and litigation.

The NEP prioritizes disparate treatment claims over disparate-impact claims. Disparate-impact liability remains codified in Title VII and continues to be available to private plaintiffs, but the EEOC states it will eliminate disparate impact from its own investigations “to the maximum degree possible” and will not pursue disparate-impact litigation, consistent with a 2025 executive order on the subject.

The plan singles out programs framed as diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) or similar terms for scrutiny. Cited examples include:

• Race- or sex-based quotas or “aspirational goals;”
• Diverse hiring panel policies;
• Mandatory diversity statements;
• Employee demographic data shared with non-HR personnel; and
• Executive compensation tied to diversity metrics.

The NEP also prioritizes cases that could clarify the application of several recent Supreme Court decisions, including Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services; Muldrow v. St. Louis; Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard; Groff v. DeJoy on religious accommodations; Bostock v. Clayton County on single-sex spaces, the right to express the binary nature of sex, and religious accommodation; and the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act.

Additional stated priorities include hiring practices that give preference to foreign national workers, protections for vulnerable workers such as low-wage earners and workers with disabilities, and retaliation against employees who participate in EEOC proceedings.

The plan does not change existing anti-discrimination law, but it indicates the enforcement priorities the EEOC intends to pursue for the remainder of the current administration. A related June 9, 2026, DOJ opinion questioning the constitutionality of disparate-impact liability reinforces the same enforcement direction.

How:

• Audit DEI programs, policies, and job postings for quotas or diversity-linked practices.
• Review your hiring procedures, job postings, recruitment info, and immigration policies for language that could function as a race, sex, or national origin proxy.
• Train HR staff and managers on unbiased decision-making.
• Confirm compliance with state and local anti-discrimination laws.
• Monitor for new guidance from the EEOC and other federal agencies.

Additional Resources:

National Enforcement Plan (NEP) Fiscal years 2025-2029

Constitutionality of Disparate-Impact Liability Under Title VII

Trump Administration Releases National Policy Framework on Artificial Intelligence

Who: All employers

When: Released March 20, 2026; not yet in effect

On March 20, 2026, the Trump administration released “A National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence.” The framework is not legally binding and is based on Executive Order 14365, which Trump signed in December 2025. It aims to balance innovation, economic growth, and risk mitigation.

The framework proposes federal preemption of state laws that impose undue burdens or undermine the federal goal of achieving global AI dominance, which could impact AI regulations California, Colorado, Illinois, Texas, and New York City.

The framework addresses seven priorities:

• Protecting children and empowering parents;
• Safeguarding and strengthening American communities;
• Respecting intellectual property rights and supporting creators;
• Preventing censorship and protecting free speech;
• Enabling innovation and ensuring American AI dominance;
• Educating Americans and developing an AI-ready workforce; and
• Federal preemption of state AI laws.

Some members of Congress introduced the GUARDRAILS Act in March 2026, which would prevent Executive Order 14365 from taking effect, protect Americans from AI technologies, and allow states to adopt their own AI laws.

How:

• Monitor state and federal AI-related regulations.
• Follow all applicable AI-related laws.
• Monitor for the deployment of federal preemption of state AI-related laws.

Additional Resources:

President Donald J. Trump Unveils National AI Legislative Framework

Executive Order 14365

Trump Administration Executive Order Addresses DEI-Related Programs for Federal Contractors

Who: Federal agencies that work with federal contractors

When: Contracts must be updated by April 25, 2026

On March 26, 2026, President Trump signed an Executive Order (EO) titled, “Addressing DEI Discrimination by Federal Contractors.” The purpose is to prevent “racially discriminatory DEI activities” by requiring federal contractors to update their contracts with specific language.

The executive order defines racially discriminatory DEI activities as disparate treatment based on race or ethnicity with regard to:

• Recruitment;
• Employment (e.g., hiring, promotions);
• Contracting (e.g., vendor agreements);
• Program participation; or
• Allocation or deployment of an entity’s resources.

The EO defines program participation as membership or participation in, or access or admission to:

• Training, mentoring, or leadership development programs;
• Educational opportunities;
• Clubs;
• Associations; or
• Similar opportunities sponsored or established by the contractor or subcontractor.

By April 25, 2026, federal agencies must include a clause on DEI programs in contracts covered by the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act. The requirements apply to all federal contractors and subcontractors. The contracts must include this language:

In connection with the performance of work under this contract, [the contractor/appropriate party (contractor)] agrees as follows:

• The contractor will not engage in any racially discriminatory DEI activities, as defined in section 2 of the Executive Order of March 26, 2026 (Addressing DEI Discrimination by Federal Contractors);
• The contractor will furnish all information and reports, including providing access to books, records, and accounts, as required by the contracting agency pursuant to the Executive Order of March 26, 2026 (Addressing DEI Discrimination by Federal Contractors), for purposes of ascertaining compliance with this clause;
• In the event of the contractor’s or a subcontractor’s noncompliance with this clause, this contract may be canceled, terminated, or suspended in whole or in part, and the contractor or subcontractor may be declared ineligible for further Government contracts;
• The contractor will report any subcontractor’s known or reasonably knowable conduct that may violate this clause to the contracting department or agency and take any appropriate remedial actions directed by the contracting department or agency;
• The contractor will inform the contracting department or agency if a subcontractor sues the contractor and the suit puts at issue, in any way, the validity of this clause; and
• The contractor recognizes that compliance with the requirements of this clause are material to the Government’s payment decisions for purposes of section 3729(b)(4) of title 31, United States Code (False Claims Act).

The possible penalties for noncompliance with the new contractual provisions include canceling, terminating, or suspending the covered contract. Contractors may also be suspended or debarred from government contracting.

The Office of Management and Budget will identify high-risk economic sectors and issue compliance guidance to contracting agencies. The Attorney General will prioritize cases brought under the False Claims Act and review civil cases that allege violations. Relevant agencies must report the results of their review of the implementation of the contract clause to the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy within 120 days of the issuance of the executive order.

How:

• Review and update your DEI-related policies and programs as needed.
• Update your contracts with the required DEI-related language.
• Watch for compliance guidance to be issued on this topic.
• Consult with legal counsel to ensure compliance.

Additional Resources:

Addressing DEI Discrimination by Federal Contractors Executive Order

Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Addresses DEI Discrimination by Federal Contractors

Trump Signs Executive Order on AI Cybersecurity and Frontier Model Review

Who: All employers

When: Effective immediately

On June 2, 2026, President Trump signed an executive order, “Promoting Advanced Artificial Intelligence Innovation and Security,” directing federal agencies to strengthen cybersecurity defenses, expand the use of AI-enabled defensive tools, and coordinate with the private sector on vulnerability management. The order responds to concerns about AI models capable of identifying and exploiting software vulnerabilities faster than human researchers.

The order establishes a voluntary framework to be developed within 60 days, under which developers of “covered frontier” AI models can work with the government to determine whether a model meets a classified cybersecurity-risk threshold and, if so, provide the federal government with early access to the model for up to 30 days before its broader public release. The order expressly states that it does not create a mandatory licensing, preclearance, or permitting requirement for AI development or release.

Within 30 days, the order also directs the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency to issue new guidance and binding operational directives to harden federal systems and expand access to AI-enabled defensive tools for federal agencies, state and local governments, and critical infrastructure operators. Separately, it directs the Treasury Department to establish an “AI cybersecurity clearinghouse” to coordinate vulnerability discovery and remediation with industry and directs the Office of Management and Budget to identify federal grant funding that could support AI vulnerability-detection efforts.

The order directs the Attorney General to prioritize enforcement of existing federal criminal statutes against anyone who uses AI to gain unauthorized access to, or damage, computer systems, or who uses AI in furtherance of another crime.

The order does not address data privacy, data protection, or AI-specific privacy threats such as prompt injection or data poisoning. Its voluntary framework does not apply to open-source or open-weight AI models. As an executive order rather than legislation, it is not permanent, and a future administration could modify or rescind it.

How:

• Review your AI vendor contracts.
• Thoroughly test your patch management processes.
• Assess your defenses against privacy attacks targeting AI.
• Monitor forthcoming implementation guidance.

Additional Resources:

Promoting Advanced Artificial Intelligence Innovation and Security

USCIS Extends Form I-9 Expiration Date

Who: All employers

When: Effective immediately

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) updated the expiration date on Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification, to May 31, 2027. The agency made no other changes.

Employers must use the Form 1-9 that has the revision date of August 1, 2023. That form may have an expiration date of July 31, 2026, or May 31, 2027. Employers are required to start using the I-9 with the May 31, 2027, expiration date by July 31, 2026. The expiration date of the instructions for Form I-9 was also changed to May 31, 2027.

Employers do not need to update previously properly completed Forms I-9.

How: Update your electronic Form I-9 system to use the form with the May 31, 2027, expiration date as soon as possible but no later than July 31, 2026.

Additional Resources:

I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification Form

Instructions for Form I-9

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

Change on Green Card Rules for Work Visa Holders in the US

On May 22nd, USCIS issued guidance that may have a huge impact on companies that employ foreign national employees on temporary work visas.

Under this guidance, most visa holders who want to apply for Green Card (Permanent Residence) may need to depart the US and go through the consular processing abroad rather than seek to adjust their status from within the US – including those with visas such as H-1B and L1.

H-1B and L-1 visas (“dual intent” visas) were designed by Congress to allow workers to pursue a Green Card from within the US, while maintaining their nonimmigrant status.

If USCIS starts redirecting workers to consular processing, sponsored employees would need to leave the US to complete their Green Card applications at a US consulate in their home country. That means potential gaps in employment, disruption to ongoing projects, and no guarantee of when the employee may return.

Next Steps for Employers

Employers with foreign national employees on work visas should:

• Make a list of potentially affected employees
• For each employee that is going to apply for Green Card, work with immigration counsel to put together a solid case of why employee should be approved without going through the consular processing.

Additional Resources:

https://www.uscis.gov/newsroom/news-releases/us-citizenship-and-immigration-services-will-grant-adjustment-of-status-only-in-extraordinary