The Race for a COVID-19 Vaccine

Many of you have been asking whether you can make the COVID-19 vaccination mandatory for your employees now that it is starting to become available. In most states, employees within our industry will be included in the first tier of recipients. But what does this mean, given that some polls suggest 40% of the population wouldn’t voluntarily get vaccinated? Can we require employees to get vaccinated?

To answer those questions, Littler has published a 29 page-white paper. The Readers Digest version – along with some additional thoughts – are below. We covered this topic during the December 15 virtual home care and hospice presentation with Bill Dombi of the National Association of Home Care & Hospice. If you have not yet done so, you can register to watch the event here.

  • We recommend waiting before taking a firm position on “mandatory” vaccinations.

o  First, you must understand the actual vaccine that is potentially available to your workforce. Are there any exclusions in the emergency use authorizations on who is eligible for the vaccine from a medical perspective (i.e., people with certain preexisting conditions)? You wouldn’t want to make it mandatory for them to get vaccinated.

o  We also need to know more about the side effects and how effective the vaccines are in practical use. You could see the potential argument if you made employees choose between their job and a brand new vaccine that may have negative side effects and not be as effective as initially thought.

o  Waiting will also give you time to see how your workforce is reacting to the new vaccines. Are they enthusiastic or reticent?

o  Similarly, it is good to know how the rest of the industry will respond. There is a safety in numbers, particularly when we know plaintiff attorneys are circling on this issue.

o  Also, maybe the government will make the call for you. As you know, some states require flu shots for healthcare workers, so it is possible certain state governments could treat a COVID-19 vaccination the same way.

  • It is important to note the quotation marks I used above. I did that because employers really cannot make vaccinations completely mandatory. They must always allow ex
    ceptions based on health and religious beliefs.

o  The EEOC already has stated that employees may be entitled to an exemption from a mandatory vaccination requirement based on an ADA disability that prevents them from taking the influenza vaccine, and there is no reason to believe that the EEOC would stray from this view when dealing with a vaccine for COVID-19. (Note that a similar analysis would apply to pregnant employees.)

o  Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, once an employer receives notice that an employee’s sincerely held religious belief, practice, or observance prevents him or her from taking the vaccine, the employer must provide a reasonable accommodation unless it would pose an undue hardship as defined by Title VII. This is a tricky area – you would want to talk to an attorney before terminating someone who refuses to vaccinate on religious grounds.

  • A few other points:

o  Mandatory vaccinations may lead to potential workers’ compensation claims from employees who suffer an adverse reaction to a potential vaccine.

o  An employer that does not adopt measures to prevent the spread of the coronavirus at work adequately may face liability for failure to comply with its general duty to provide a safe workplace.

o  It is likely that robust workplace safety policies, even in the absence of an employer vaccination mandate, can meet this obligation, particularly based on the anticipated level of uncertainty regarding the effectiveness and/or potential side effects of a vaccine.

Given all of this, let me offer a few suggestions some of our clients are using to encourage employees to become vaccinated:

·     Pay employees who get vaccinated a one-time bonus (probably the best option of the three).

·     Limit shifts for those who do not get vaccinated to nonclient facing roles, citing patient safety concerns.

·     Require employees who do not get vaccinated to use PTO concurrent with any sick leave for quarantining.

As a final note, you also might be interested to know that teachers are in Phase 1B of the CDC/ACIP vaccination plan, which could start within the month. This is important to the extent you have employees who cannot work because their kids are home and unable to attend school in person. We hope this means we will be returning to regular order in the near future.

Ask the Experts: The #1 Private Duty Employment Question for Private Duty

Through a partnership with Littler Mendelson P.C Labor & Employment Law Solutions, we are excited to share the “Ask the Experts” Article. Each week, we will feature a new question, from you our members, related to workplace issues and topics that will be answered from our experts and partners at Littler. 

This week’s question comes from one of our private duty home care members and concerns what the number one question Littler receives and addresses on a regular basis.

Question: What is the number one employment law question Littler receives from private duty home care operators?

Answer by Will Vail 

The number one question we get is how to operate a live-in arrangement in a legally compliant manner.  The first thing home care agencies should know is that live-in arrangements aren’t illegal (some think they are).  But to operate in a compliant manner, you would want to look at both federal and state law.  Under federal law, the agreement should be in writing to stand the best chance of surviving any sort of scrutiny of your arrangement.  The number of hours worked versus non-working hours in a day will depend on state law as well as whether the caregiver falls within the definition of a live-in.  Generally, state law will dictate whether you can deduct time spent on meals.  And meeting the definition of live-in determines whether the parties can exclude other non-working time during the day. If you are considering setting up a live-in line of business, you should talk to an attorney to make sure you begin and execute the process in a compliant manner.

Do you have a question for our experts at Littler?

As part of our commitment to you as our members we want to make sure to support you with the information and leadership expertise you need to provide quality private duty home care and services.

If you have a question for our experts at Littler, please feel free to send your question to erb@nahc.org and we will work to get your question answered as quickly as possible and then featured in an upcoming Ask the Experts section of the Private Duty Source. 

About Littler

At Littler, we understand that workplace issues can’t wait. With access to more than 1,500 employment attorneys in over 80 offices around the world, our clients don’t have to. We aim to go beyond best practices, creating solutions that help clients navigate a complex business world. With deep experience and resources that are local, everywhere, we are fully focused on your business. With a diverse team of the brightest minds, we foster a culture that celebrates original thinking. And with powerful proprietary technology, we disrupt the status quo – delivering groundbreaking innovation that prepares employers not just for what’s happening today, but for what’s likely to happen tomorrow. For over 75 years, our firm has harnessed these strengths to offer fresh perspectives on each matter we advise, litigate, mediate, and negotiate. Because at Littler, we’re fueled by ingenuity and inspired by you.

About Will Vail, Special Council

William Vail brings a wealth of private practice and in-house experience to every matter he handles. For nearly seven years, he was lead employment counsel two separate divisions of largest post-acute health care provider in the nation (the home health, hospice and community care division and nursing center division). He later was lead employment and litigation counsel for the largest home health and hospice provider in the nation following a corporate reorganization. In addition to a wide variety of employment issues, Will is familiar with False Claims Act, professional liability and general liability matters related to healthcare operations. 

Will is a core member of Littler’s healthcare practice group. He has experience litigating across the United States, providing advice and counsel to both legal and non-legal stakeholders, performing due diligence related to mergers and acquisitions, helping start-ups begin operations in a compliant method, winding down operations, conducting management training, and assisting in the integration of new entities into going concerns. 

William Vail began his legal career in 2004 as a law clerk to a federal judge sitting in the Western District of Virginia. He then transitioned to private practice in Louisville, Kentucky, for a regional full-service firm and later a national labor and employment boutique firm. At Littler, Will is based in Louisville as well as Atlanta. 

*Not licensed to practice law in Georgia

New Webinar: Home Care Industry Legislative Update

The National Association for Home Care & Hospice (NAHC) and Private Duty Home Care at NAHC have partnered with Littler Mendelson and the Home Care Association of America (HCAOA), to provide a webinar series to assist home health and home care providers in navigating the complex and seemingly ever-changing legal landscape brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic.

The next edition in this webinar series will air live on Wednesday, November 11, 2020 from 12:00 to 2:00PM Eastern. The webinar is free, but registration is required.

REGISTER NOW!

During this event, our team will provide an in-depth analysis of anticipated legal developments and the projected impacts on the Home Care and Home Health industries after the presidential election. Angelo Spinola and William Vail will further analyze and discuss anticipated developments related to the ruling against the Department of Labor’s (DOL) definition of a “Health Care Provider” under the FFCRA paid leave regulations, and provide updates on negotiations for a 4th stimulus package. We will also review practical steps for agencies to stay in compliance with pay-related laws and regulations as we plan for 2021.

These complimentary webinars aim to bring the industry together for real-time advocacy and legal updates, practical guidance in light of the same and provide a forum for answers to your most pressing questions.

Faculty

  • Angelo Spinola, Shareholder, Co-Chair, Home Health and Home Care Industry Group, Littler
  • William Vail, Special Counsel, Littler
  • William A. Dombi, Esq. President, NAHC
  • Vicki Hoak, Executive Director, HCAOA

REGISTER

Updates to Recommended COVID-19 Operational Protocols Guide

The Recommended Operational Protocols Guide, created earlier this year by a group of concerned stakeholders, including the National Association for Home Care & Hospice, has been updated with important new information for home care agencies. These updates are part of our promise to you that the guide will continue to function as a “living document” meant to offer recommendations for providers to respond to COVID in a responsible way that protects the  patients/clients they serve as well as those direct care workers out on the front lines risking their own safety and that of their families, to provide essential services and care for some of the most vulnerable.

As new information about this novel disease is obtained through research and experiential learning, updates will be made to the document and widely shared to ensure recommended operational protocols are up to date.

The Home Care Steering Committee and other contributing expert members have created Recommended Operations Protocols for home care agencies dealing with COVID-19 and we strongly encourage all NAHC members to study this document closely.

The Protocols cover topics including, but not limited to:

  • Management action steps;
  • Communication to clients and patients;
  • Client screening;
  • Patient/Client training
  • Direct care worker training
  • Personal Protective Equipment
  • Response to suspected Covid-19 in patient home;
  • How to cope with emotional reactions to stress situations, such as a pandemic;
  • and much, much more.

Each agency must make a decision about its best practices based on the information available to it and the circumstances it faces in its area. There is no obligation or expectation that any one agency will follow all of these Recommended Operational Protocols.

Please note this document will likely continue to evolve as new developments inform our understanding of this novel disease, governmental and non-governmental agencies provide additional guidance and information how it spreads and the best ways to combat it. Please pay attention to the version date in the footer and independently review the source guidance.

These protocols are not a substitute for experienced legal counsel. For use in practice, it is highly recommended that experienced counsel assist with development of protocols for your agency pursuant to the circumstances of each specific employer and factual situation.

We thank our valued partners at Littler and other contributing members for their unwavering dedication to the home care community and the delivery of quality, home-based care and services to all Americans who need them.

 

Ask the Experts: Summary of the GAO Report: Observations on the Effects of the Home Care Rule

Through a partnership with Littler Mendelson P.C Labor & Employment Law Solutions, we are excited to share the “Ask the Experts” Article. Each week, we will feature a new question, from you our members, related to workplace issues and topics that will be answered from our experts and partners at Littler.

This week, our experts at Littler share a summary with us of the recent GAO report and the observations on the effects of the home care rule.

Thank you to our expert authors Angelo Spinola, Will Vail, and Elizabeth Barrera.

Summary of the GAO Report:
Observations on the Effects of the Home Care Rule

In 2013, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) revised its regulations on domestic service employment and companionship services under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).  The final rule, known as the Home Care Rule, extended minimum wage and overtime protections to most non-medical home care workers.  The DOL anticipated that the new rule would increase wages for caregivers by providing for overtime wages, reduce worker turnover and result in higher quality of care being delivered to the consumers of home care services.  After protracted litigation, the Home Care Rule became effective in November 2015.  

Several Members of Congress requested the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to examine the impact (if any) the Home Care Rule has had on workers and consumers of home care services.  The GAO interviewed 15 national-level organizations and analyzed national survey data on workers and consumers.  It also observed the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on home care workers and the consumers of home care services.  On October 19, 2020, the GAO issued its report.  

Ultimately, the GOA found that the Home Care Rule has not increased caregiver wages and in some cases has resulted in consumers of home care services receiving fewer services.  For example, some states changed their Medicaid programs to limit home care workers’ hours to avoid overtime costs.  Some provider agencies discontinued programs that provided 24-hour or live-in care, as well as respite care.  These changes have caused additional stress on family caregivers.  Restricting work hours also has led to increased costs for recruitment, training, scheduling, and recordkeeping activities, such as tracking overtime hours and time spent traveling between clients.  

Little Positive Impact on Workers

Below is a summary of the GAO’s findings of the impact of the Home Care Rule on home care workers:

  • Home care workers saw a slight increase in the average number of hours typically worked (33 hours per week in 2010 to 34 hours in 2019).
  • There was an increase in the proportion of home care workers who reported working full-time hours (defined as 35+ hours per week) (49% in 2019 versus 38% in 2010).
  • Home care workers’ weekly pay did not meaningfully increase relative to workers with similar occupations ($352 per week in 2010 versus $400 in 2019, as compared to other industries: $347 per week in 2010 and $390 in 2019).
  • The number of home care workers working overtime did not change after implementation of the Home Care Rule (about 10%), but the number of overtime hours a home care worker worked did decrease following implementation (20 hours in 2010 to 17 hours in 2019).
  • Part-time home care workers may have benefited from hours redistributions. 
  • Home care workers are more likely to work for multiple consumers or third-party employers to maintain their pre-Home Care Rule hours (about 7% work for multiple employers).  Note, there was no change in the proportion of home care workers working for multiple employers following implementation.

Tremendous Negative Impact on Consumers

For consumers, the GAO found the Home Care Rule exacerbated the challenges in finding and hiring home care workers.  Where states or provider agencies have added hour restrictions to avoid incurring overtime costs, some consumers have hired additional workers to ensure their needs are covered.  In other instances, family or informal caregivers fill the gap.  And in still other situations, their needs go unmet.  Needless to say, continuity of care has been negatively impacted.  But, interestingly, the GAO found that there was an actual decrease in the number of individuals living in institutions from before to after the Home Care Rule was implemented.  

Final Observation

One final note, as the U.S. population ages and the demand grows for home care workers, employment in the industry is expected to increase nearly 40 percent in the next decade.  But even now, many home care organizations face continuing difficulty in finding workers.  The GAO report seems to make clear that the Home Care Rules limitations will have a negative impact on the ability of consumers to find the quality and quantity of caregivers needed.

 1. 52% of workers in occupations with similar entry requirements reported usually working full-time, an increase of 6% from 2010.  These similar occupations are: food preparation workers; combined food preparation and servicing workers, including fast food; waiters and waitresses; janitors and cleaners, except maids and housekeeping cleaners; maids and housekeeping cleaners; cashiers; retail salespersons; and stock clerks and order fillers.

About Littler 

At Littler, we understand that workplace issues can’t wait. With access to more than 1,500 employment attorneys in over 80 offices around the world, our clients don’t have to. We aim to go beyond best practices, creating solutions that help clients navigate a complex business world. With deep experience and resources that are local, everywhere, we are fully focused on your business. With a diverse team of the brightest minds, we foster a culture that celebrates original thinking. And with powerful proprietary technology, we disrupt the status quo – delivering groundbreaking innovation that prepares employers not just for what’s happening today, but for what’s likely to happen tomorrow. For over 75 years, our firm has harnessed these strengths to offer fresh perspectives on each matter we advise, litigate, mediate, and negotiate. Because at Littler, we’re fueled by ingenuity and inspired by you.

New NAHC Webinar: Home Care Industry Update

The National Association for Home Care & Hospice (NAHC) has partnered with Littler Mendelson to provide a webinar series to assist home health and home care providers to navigate through the complex and seemingly ever-changing legal landscape brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic. On September 15, please join industry experts Angelo Spinola and Will Vail for…