REQUIRED NOTICES FOR TERMINATING EMPLOYEES IN CALIFORNIA

REQUIRED NOTICES FOR

TERMINATING EMPLOYEES IN CALIFORNIA

These lists of notices are grouped by federal requirements and California requirements, with links to applicable notices, laws, and forms. There are other additional documents which may be recommended or required under specific circumstances, such as an employee separation agreement. Please consult with an employment law attorney before determining which notices and documents should be used in any particular situation.

Federal Requirements

1. For employers with 20 or more employees, the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA) requires employers to provide an election notice to employees who are enrolled in the employer’s group health plan.This notice may be obtained from the employer’s health insurance provider.
2. For certain employers with 100 or more employees, the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act, mandates that notices be sent out to employees 60 days prior to termination in the event of mass layoffs or plant closings.
3. The IRS requires notice to terminated employees within certain time frames for the purpose of advising the employees with regard to retirement benefits, if any.

California Requirements

1. The California Employment Development Department (EDD) requires employers to provide their published unemployment benefits pamphlet, For Your Benefit, DE 2320, to all discharged or laid off employees on or by the date of termination or layoff.
2. California Unemployment Insurance Code §1089 requires employers to provide a writtenNotice to Employee as to Change in Relationship to all discharged or laid off employees upon termination. No written notice is required if the employee voluntary quits, is promoted or demoted, experiences a change in work assignment or location, or if work ceases due to a trade dispute.
3. The Department of Health Care Services requires employers with 20 or more employees to provide a Notice to Terminating Employees, DHCS 9061, to certain employees covered under the Health Insurance Premium Payment (HIPP) program.
4. Employers with 2-19 employees (and employers whose employees are initially covered by federal COBRA laws when their 18 months of COBRA coverage expires) must notify any covered, terminated employees of their Cal-COBRAcontinuation rights. An employer’s health insurance provider may provide such notices.
5. California Labor Code §2808(b) requires employers to provide notification to employees of all disability extension and conversion coverage options under any employer-sponsored planunder which the employees may remain eligible following termination of employment.
6. For certain employers with more than 100 employees, the California Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act requires employersto provide written notice to affected employees at least 60 days in advance of any plant closing or mass layoff.

Free Evaluation

The employment law attorneys at Gehres Law Group, P.C. are pleased to offer a complementary evaluation to employers and employees who may be affected by these notice requirements or have other questions concerning an employee termination. Contact us today. You’ll be glad you did.

from Gehres Law Group http://ift.tt/2eawo0o
via IFTTT

TRADEMARKING A NAME OR A LOGO OR BOTH?

In establishing a new business, owners often seek legal advice in connection with branding their business by developing and securing their company’s intellectual property.  Part of this inquiry typically involves the question, “Should we seek trademark registration of the named business brand or the company’s design logos, or both?”The short answer is “both”. However, registering multiple trademarks with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is sometimes not feasible for new business owners working within the confines of a tight budget. So which trademark registration should take priority?

Differences Between Design Marks and Word Marks

Most businesses will not only have a company name brand, but also a design logo identifying the company.  In the trademark world, we refer to the company name brand as a standard character mark or “word mark,” and the design logo as a “design mark”.  These two trademarks are unique in their analysis and examination at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and they require two separate filings.  When you apply to register your company name “word mark,” you are protecting the name itself,separate from any font, coloring, or other styling. In other words, you are seeking protection from third parties using your company name or a similar one, with like or similar goods or services.

On the other hand, when you apply to register your logo or “design mark,”you are seeking protection over the very specific shape, orientation, stylization, and/or color in the mark. Your company name may or may not be a part of the logo, but you are seeking protection from third parties using the specific design of your logo, or something similar, without regard to the company name.

Which Type of Mark Should Take Priority?

Since each type of trademark registration provides different protection and rights, it is not surprising that thebroadest level oflegal protection is achieved by registering both a “word mark” and a “design mark”.  However, where cost is an issue, you must determine which is the most important.  First, look at your company name and ask how unique is it?  Is it unique enough to guarantee that it will qualify for trademark registration, or does it contain generic or descriptive terms?  If it is unique enough,you should typically apply for registration ofthe company name, the business “word mark,” rather than a logo, a “design mark.”The reason for this result is that the applicable laws offer broader protection for word marks than design marks.

As suggested above, when you register a logo, you are getting protection only over that exact representation of your business brand, and that protection does not typically extend to the actual name of your company, even if the name is included in the logo. In contrast, when you register your company name as a word mark, you can effectively prevent other businesses from using your company name, or anything confusingly similar. Your company name is protected regardless of what kind of styling is added to it or how it is presented to consumers—the words themselves are protected—which is often how customers identify a company.

Except for larger companies, a logo generally has less brand recognition for a business than the actual name. Therefore, if you were to register only your company’s logo, you wouldreceive the protective benefit of registration only if someone used the same logo, or something similar. However, if it is determined that your business name contains words that render the mark generic or descriptive such that trademark protection at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is not possible, it is generally recommended to register your logo so that you still gain some protection over your trademark, even though that protection is somewhat limited.

***************************************

There are many exceptions to these general principles, so it is critical to have your company’s intellectual property reviewed by a trained professional who knows the applicable laws. The trusted and experienced trademark attorneys at Gehres Law Group work to secure the broadest protection for our clients’ intellectual property.We are committed to providing the highest quality service available at affordable rates.  Contact us today for a free evaluation of your company’s intellectual property.

from Gehres Law Group http://ift.tt/2elPCPM
via IFTTT

TAKING STEPS TO CORRECT NEGATIVE REVIEWS ON YELP

We previously published an article here titled “Negative Reviews On Yelp Hurting Your Business?” in which we explained that, under appropriate circumstances, a business owner may want to consider filing a suit for defamation against persons publishing false negative reviews on Yelp or similar consumer review websites.

THE YELP CASE

Now the issue of defamatory content on Yelp is all over the news, especially here in California, as Yelp has gone all the way to the California Supreme Court protesting an order directing it to remove a negative consumer review.  The appellate decision now up for review by the California Supreme Court is Hassell v. Bird, 247 Cal. App. 4th 1336 (Court of Appeal Case No. A143233).

Dawn Hassell is an attorney who sued a former client, Ms. Ava Bird, for posting allegedly false and defaming comments in a review on Yelp.  Ms. Hassell got a judgment against Ms. Bird, who defaulted in the case, but Ms. Bird then failed to comply with the Court order directing her to remove her defamatory review from Yelp.

Hassell had not included Yelp as a defendant in the case, but when Bird failed to remove her review, Hassell sought an order from the Court directing Yelp to remove the defamatory review, which was granted.

One might think that Yelp would be happy to comply in removing consumer reviews that have already been determined, in a legal proceeding, to have been defamatory.  But that is NOT so. Instead, Yelp appealed the order to the First Appellate District of the Court of Appeals.  Yelp argued that it should not be bound by a judgment in a case in which it was not a party, especially an uncontested default judgment.  Yelp also argued that the order interfered with the freedom of the Internet, and the First Amendment Free Speech, and the Federal “Communications Decency Act”, which protects Internet Companies from liability for the content consumers post on their websites.  And Yelp lost again!

Now the California Supreme Court has agreed to hear Yelp’s appeal, and it’s a big to-do, with lots of publicity and comment.  The defenders of unbridled free speech on the Internet are all worked up and are rooting Yelp on.  It will be interesting to see how the California Supreme Court rules.

TAKEAWAY FOR THE DEFAMED BUSINESS OWNER

In the meantime, Business Owners who are considering filing a defamation lawsuit based on false and defamatory postings on Yelp, or similar Consumer Review websites, should think very carefully before proceeding against a fictitious (DOE) defendant,  or a potentially indigent defendant.  You certainly don’t want to have to litigate against Yelp, and if you don’t have a real defendant, with sufficient assets that they will have to participate in trial, and obey Court judgments, you are probably better off not suing.   Instead, you are probably better off just filing appropriate responses on Yelp, or wherever, explaining your side of the story.

The business attorneys of Gehres Law Group will follow this appeal and comment again in this Blog when the California Supreme Court decides the case.

from Gehres Law Group http://ift.tt/2eofkGg
via IFTTT