On June 17, the U.S. Small Business Administration and the Department of the Treasury released a revised Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loan forgiveness application, implementing the fixes from the 乌鸦传媒-backed Paycheck Protection Program Flexibility Act enacted June 5. The agencies also released a streamlined 鈥淓Z version鈥 of loan forgiveness application that may be used in limited circumstances. The EZ application requires fewer calculations and less documentation for eligible borrowers. Details regarding the applicability of these provisions are available in the instructions to the new EZ application form. Both applications give borrowers the option of using the original 8-week covered period (if their loan was made before June 5, 2020) or an extended 24-week covered period. These changes will result in a more efficient process and make it easier for businesses to realize full forgiveness of their PPP loan. 乌鸦传媒 continues to press for improvements to the PPP and will provide further updates as they develop.
Organizes bipartisan letter to Senate Leadership
On June 15, ahead of the markup of the legislation in the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, 乌鸦传媒 released a full analysis of the INVEST Act, the House Democrats鈥 recently introduced surface transportation reauthorization bill. This seven-page document provides a deep dive into the provisions of the bill, including analysis on investment and funding levels, workforce related policies, environmental initiatives and regulations, project delivery and safety, technology, research, and development. A one-page overview of that analysis is also available here. As the legislative process on this bill moves forward and amendments are adopted, 乌鸦传媒 will continue to provide updates on this measure.
Whether your workplace has remained open throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, is just reopening now, or will do so sometime later this year, employers should be prepared for the possibility that some employees may refuse to work due to COVID-related safety concerns.
A federal district court on May 30 invalidated portions of a rule issued by the present National Labor Relations Board to modify the prior Administration鈥檚 regulation (often referred to as the 鈥渜uickie鈥 or 鈥渁mbush鈥 election rule) on union representation-case procedures. The Board swiftly responded by announcing that it would implement the remaining portions of the 乌鸦传媒-supported rule as of May 31.
Association Survey and Data Collected by Procore Measure Impacts of the Pandemic, Showing Signs of a Construction Recovery, but Labor Shortages and Project Cancellations Show Industry Needs Federal Help
Viral Tests for Active Cases Still Allowed
乌鸦传媒 and other contractor associations seeking multiemployer pension reform jointly released a new study on June 1 finding that composite retirement plans would have fared better during the coronavirus pandemic and related market declines than traditional defined-benefit multi-employer plans, allowing participants to receive higher benefits and attracting more employer participants. The study makes it clear that employees and employers stand to benefit once Congress authorizes the use of composite plans.
According to the latest Contractor Compensation Quarterly (CCQ) published by PAS, Inc., contractors are projecting 2020 construction staff wages to increase an average of 3.55% (excludes 0% projections), reported by over 300 companies in the 38th edition of the Construction / Construction Management Staff Salary Survey. For pay increase comparison, according to the WorldatWork, across all industries exempt professionals saw 2019 increases of 3.2% and they are projecting 2020 increases of 3.3%. For construction they reported a 3.9% increase in 2019 and are projecting 3.3% for 2020.
Employers May Need to Take Action
Courts have struggled to uniformly decide whether Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which makes it unlawful for employers to discriminate because of a person鈥檚 鈥渟ex,鈥 protects employees from discrimination based on their sexual orientation or transgender status. Specifically, courts have not consistently interpreted Title VII鈥檚 prohibition on discrimination 鈥渂ecause of . . . sex.鈥 Originally, courts considering the question held that Title VII鈥檚 ban did not cover employees who were gay, and most said it did not protect employees based on transgender status. Within the last decade, however, many courts and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission began to interpret 鈥渟ex鈥 to include LGBTQ employees. Not all courts, nor the Department of Justice, agreed with this interpretation. This issue was presented to the Supreme Court of the United States through three cases.