Dan Chammas – Important Laws for California Employers

Dan Chammas is a lawyer based in Southern California who focuses on employment and consumer class action suits. Over the course of his career, he has defended several major companies in important cases throughout California, and is regarded as an expert in employment law. There are many legal regulations that affect California employers that many companies (especially small businesses and entrepreneurs), may not be aware of. There have also been many major changes to employment law in the past several years. Here are some of the most important laws for California employers to be aware of.

Dan Chammas

The first factor to be aware of is the classification of independent contractors. Many people are unaware of the exact regulations surrounding independent contractors, and what defines an independent contractor. If an employer knowingly or voluntarily classifies an employee as an independent contractor when they should not be, they may be charged penalties ranging anywhere from $5,000 to $25,000, depending on the frequency and severity of the violations. Employers who repeatedly misclassify their employers as independent contractors will be subject to higher penalties. Additionally, they cannot charge their employees any fees or deduct their pay to cover their misclassification.

There are also many laws covering discrimination when it comes to hiring decisions, wages, and employee benefits, many of which have been enacted fairly recently. During the hiring process, employers are not allowed to use consumer credit reports to make their decisions (although there are several notable exceptions to this rule). Job applications requiring credit check information must be altered to comply with this rule.

Employers also cannot discriminate on the basis of ‘gender expression’ or ‘gender identity’. Employers also must allow all employees to dress and act consistently with their own gender identity, and cannot use language in employee handbooks that restricts gender expression. Additionally, employers also may not discriminate based on genetic information, specifically any genetic tests, or a history of disease in the employee’s family history.

There are also many regulations regarding health care coverage for California employers. Specifically, employers must continue to provide regular group health care coverage during an employee’s pregnancy disability leave. The terms and conditions regarding the employee’s health care coverage must remain the same during this leave period. Employers must also provide the same health benefits for same-sex domestic partners as they would for heterosexual domestic partners, and cannot discriminate the coverage they provide on the basis of sexual orientation.

These are just a few of the many important laws that apply to employers in California. It is essential for employers to frequently review changes to employment law to ensure that they are compliant and that there is no unlawful treatment of employees. Dan Chammas is considered one of California’s most experience employment defense lawyers, and frequently advises organizations on employment law.

Dan Chammas – California Law Requires All Employers to Offer Paid Sick Leave

Dan Chammas is a California-based lawyer who has worked on a variety of important projects and cases throughout his career. An important legislation change that he has been working with is the requirement of all California employers, including non-profit organizations, to offer sick leave to their employees. Known as the California Healthy Workplaces, Healthy Families Act, it was passed in 2014, and was put into effect on July 1st, 2015.

Dan Chammas

Dan Chammas

Prior to the passage of this law, there were many small companies and organizations that were not required to offer their employees paid sick leave. However, under the new legislation, virtually all employers are affected, with no loopholes. There are a few very small exceptions, but they only apply to a select minority of employers, and cannot be used as a way to get around paying employees the family leave that they need. The law even covers employers who are based in another state, but have some employees working in California. If you live in California, but telecommute with a company that is based in another state, you are still covered under this law.

The main provision of this law is that for every thirty hours worked, the employer must provide them with one hour of sick leave. This law only applies after an employee has been working for a full thirty-day month. Employers may limit the amount of sick pay to a total of three days (or twenty-four working hours) each year. The sick days usually must roll over into the next year if they go unused. However, this roll-over does not apply if the employer provides the full amount of sick leave at the beginning of each year, instead of waiting until the employee has worked the requisite amount of hours to ‘earn’ it. Employers are also not required to provide their employees with more than six days, or 48 hours, worth of sick leave in roll-over time.

During the sick leave period, the employee must be provided with their standard, contracted hourly or salaried rate of compensation. If the employee regularly receives extra pay through commissions, this must be factored into their sick leave compensation. Sick leave can be used for a variety of different reasons, including preventative health care, or care of a family member. If the employee is terminated for any reason, the employer is not required to compensate them with sick leave.

All employers are legally required to provide written notice to their employees regarding their sick leave rights, usually through posters or signage that is displayed prominently in the workplace common areas. Employers must also keep detailed records of sick leave for at least three years. As a lawyer, Dan Chammas helps his clients navigate the ins and outs of paid sick leave.

Dan Chama’s Utilizes Historical Knowledge of Group Litigation

Class action lawsuits, although a relatively recent legal proceeding in the United States, evolved from a medieval legal concept called group litigation which emerged in England in approximately 1200AD. Group litigations involved groups of people, usually towns, villages, parishes or guilds, suing another, or being sued in common law actions. In these actions, the English courts did not question the right of an individual to bring suit on behalf of a larger group, giving rise to attorneys like Dan Chammas of Venable LLP today as legal representatives and advocates defending against class action suits. These group litigations of medieval England were originally an accepted and common practice in the common law courts of the era.

Dan Chammas

Although relatively common in medieval England in the 12th and 13th centuries, group litigation became rarer in England after 1400AD as wealth and power concentrated behind the corporate model of business, leading to suspicion and mistrust of the unincorporated legal entity. England’s common law courts experienced periods of suspension due to chaotic wars such as the Wars of the Roses, and out of this the Court of Chancery was given exclusive sway over group litigations. Nonetheless, statutes which came into being from individual group litigation decisions removed possibilities for success. The Judicature Acts of 1874 and 1975 put the death knell to equity pleading in England after 1850. Attorney Dan Chammas of the Venable LLP law firm in California continues to litigate offspring of the group litigation, the class action lawsuit, which is alive and well in the 21st century in the United States.


Attorney Dan Chammas Works With International Scope

In countries like Canada, Attorney Dan Chammas is especially cognizant of the use of terms, as Canadian ‘labor law’ refers to unionized work environments there, and the ‘employment law’ label is attached to non-unionized employees and their issues. Of such nuances are effective advocacy made, and Chammas is deeply informed in the employment laws and regulations of a variety of international countries where his clients have work relationships and where they do business. Chammas is also backed up by the depth of knowledge and experience at the law firm of Venable LLP, which brings its formidable team to bear on behalf of clients.

In China, the Law of the People’s Republic of China on Employment Contracts and the Labor Law of People’s Republic of China are the basic regulations of employer/employee relationships. The government controls the All China Federation of Trade Unions, the only labor union, and strikes are discouraged despite provision given for staging strikes and entering bargaining. In France, work weeks have come to be limited to 35 hours, and the minimum wage has also increased by 25%. French employers struggle within the strict limitations of labor laws there, and litigators like Dan Chammas find the challenges of dispute resolutions have an entirely different set of parameters in France. AT the other end of the spectrum, India’s labor regulations have been criticized for their unnecessary complexity, over the top flexibility and ancient origins. Iran’s employment practices do not comply with even basic conventions of the International Labor Organization regarding right to organize, collective bargaining or the abolition of child labor, and are still based in ancient precepts.

Mexican labor laws provide right to strike and organize in theory, but in practice independent unions find it impossible to organize in Mexico. Swedish workplace issues follow a unique model of self-regulation through labor market parties, setting working hours, minimum wage, right to overtime compensation and other regulations for workers. Civil standardization of labor laws in Switzerland basically renders all employees governed by one central set of regulations. The United Kingdom has expanded its employment law to suit the needs of its membership in the European Union and the demand for equality, and Statutes, Statutory Regulations and Case Law provide the main source of regulation of employer/employee relationships.

In the United States, experienced litigators like Dan Chammas must be familiar with the National Labor Relations Act, which guarantees the right to form unions and initiate collective bargaining and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act which prohibits employment discrimination based on age 40 or older. In addition, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act prohibits employment discrimination by both public and private employers, labor organizations, training programs and employment agencies on the basis of sex, age, or race.



Attorney Dan Chammas Works In Age of Globalization

Dan Chammas is also a legal representative to resolve disputes concerning the relationship between employer, employee and trade unions, known as collective labor law. Unions are organizations of member workers which represent the interests of members to improve their lot on the job. Unions organize to negotiate collective bargaining agreements with employers, and the relationship between member and union may vary from state to state and country to country. Legal codes may legislate aspects of the union/member relationship in an attempt to head off serious disagreements about the quality of representation or the agreements reached with employers.

Dan Chammas

Dan Chammas would have almost certainly been called upon to litigate group worker agreements known as board level codetermination rights. These statutes existed in Britain prior to many being removed in 1948 and 1979, and mandated that shareholders and/or workers have rights in electing board directors on large corporations. Germany continues today with a split board measure, while in Sweden ‘Law on board representation’ permits workers to appoint two board members and two substitutes. The parameters of worker participation on boards of large companies are often subject to litigation. Chammas could also be called upon to resolve disputes concerning boycotts, picketing and strikes by workers. Laws may exist to ban such activities, or to restrict it in various particulars.

Globalization of the economy has resulted in corporations outsourcing manufacturing operations to other countries, or moving the entire manufacturing operation to a foreign country. Attorney Dan Chammas may find himself resolving conflicts which span borders and involve the labor regulations of foreign nations as well as the protections offered large corporations and workers in our own country. It falls upon experienced advocates like Chammas to be apprised of the regulatory strictures of bodies like the International Labor Organization and the World Trade Organization, which are a focus for international bodies in the regulation of labor. The European Union is also adding to its workplace regulations apace with the growth of international manufacturing. A particularly thorny conflict of employment law which arises in the international era is the source of jurisdiction regulations for an expatriate worker. In such cases, legal experts like Chammas find it necessary to be cognizant of the employment regulations of multiple countries, and of the litigating corporation or corporations.

Employee labor unions and trade unions consistently seek today to organize labor across borders, as well as initiate collective action and labor strikes on an international basis. Of interest to class action litigators like Dan Chammas are the best interests of the corporation when faced with conflicts rising from the import of foreign workers into the established regulated employee environment of a country, and the liability of the corporation toward foreign workers’ protections.


Dan Chammas Attends 2nd Best Law School in U.S.

Stanford Law School is ranked second best law school in the United States by U.S. News & World Report, and has been ranked in the top three consistently since 1992.  Stanford enrolls over 500 students who are working toward their Doctor of Jurisprudence, and Stanford also offers four other advanced legal degrees: Master of Laws (LL. M), Master of Studies in Law (M.S.L.), Master of Science of Law (J.S.M.) and the Doctor of the Science of Law (J.S.D.).
Annual fall enrollment is around 180 students, which renders Stanford the smallest student body of any law school in the top fourteen of the United States.  Stanford Law School also offers eleven legal clinics including a nationally renowned Supreme Court litigation clinic.  1999 graduate Dan Chammas joined the finest law alumni in the nation upon attaining his Doctor of Jurisprudence, including late Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist, retired Chief Justice of California Ronald M. George and retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor.

Dan Chammas

Dan Chammas

Stanford University’s Law department was established in 1893 with the hiring of two law professors, former United States President Benjamin Harrison and Nathan Abbott.  Over the next 7 years Abbott headed up the law program and acquired additional faculty members.  From its beginnings Stanford Law was unique in its admittance of women, Hispanics, Chinese and Japanese students.  The law department of Stanford relocated to an Inner Quadrangle location in 1900, where its first law library was established along with a three-year curriculum and a charter membership in the Association of American Law Schools.  The future Stanford Law School of Dan Chammas was initiated by Stanford’s Board of Trustees in 1908 who changed the name from a law department to a Law School.  Stanford Law School was accredited by the American Bar Association in 1923.

Stanford Law School would relocate twice more, to the outer quadrangle in the 1940’s and then to its current location in the Crown Quadrangle in the 1970’s.  The national reputation of Stanford Law was elevated by the first publication of the Stanford Law Review, and the decision to limit enrollment to keep Stanford an exclusive bastion of law academia was made.  Various student organizations emerged during this period, including the Women of Stanford Law, the Stanford Chicano Law Student Association, the Environmental Law Society, and the Stanford Public Interest Foundation.  Committed to diversity, Stanford University today includes racial minorities as about a fifth of its student body, and its Law School is considered one of the ten best in the nation for minority students.

Dan Chammas benefited from curriculum innovations with access to courses in law technology, intellectual property law, environmental law and international law introduced in the 1990’s as these legal fields emerged.

Visit My Personal Profile