372 | 2024 Cal-Peculiarities ©2024 Seyfarth Shaw LLP www.seyfarth.com amends Section 527.8 to allow employers to seek a TRO on behalf of their employee where the employee suffers harassment––and not simply violence or threats of violence. 14.20 Changing Standard For Protection From Indoor Heat-Related Illness and Injury For almost 20 years, Cal/OSHA has distinguished itself from Federal OSHA in several ways, including maintaining a heat illness prevention standard with respect to employees working outdoors. Cal/OSHA also cited employers for indoor heat illness hazards under its Injury and Illness Prevention Program regulations. In 2016, SB 1167 was signed into law, which required Cal/OSHA to submit a proposal to the Standards Boards for new regulations on employee protection from indoor heat hazards.34 Since 2016, Cal/OSHA has revised the indoor heat standard several times, and the new standard is set to be adopted in March 2024. Once adopted, the regulation will apply all indoor work areas where the temperature is 82 degrees Fahrenheit or greater and there are employees present. There are, however, exceptions to the requirements such as when employees are working from home/teleworking, have limited exposure to indoor heat, or face imminent lifethreatening situations. The standard also requires employers to establish and maintain one or more cool down areas at all times, to encourage employees to take cool-down breaks, and to provide employees access to fresh, pure, suitably cool, and free of cost water close to work and cool-down areas. The regulation also requires employers to have effective emergency response procedures, closely monitor new employees during heat waves, and train employees on indoor heat illness prevention. 1 Lab. Code § 6401.7. 2 8 Cal. Code Regs. § 3203(b). 3 8 Cal. Code Regs. § 5120. 4 Pen. Code § 387(a). 5 27 Cal. Code Regs. §§ 25600, et seq. 6 8 Cal. Code Regs. § 5194. 7 Lab. Code §§ 6310-6311. 8 Health & Safety Code § 1278.5. 9 Lab. Code § 6404.5(c). 10 Lab. Code § 6404.5(e)(1-7). 11 Gov’t Code § 8350 et seq. 12 Gov’t Code § 12954. 13 8 Cal. Code Regs. § 5110. 14 Veh. Code § 23123(a): “A person shall not drive a motor vehicle while using a wireless telephone unless that telephone is specifically designed and configured to allow hands-free listening and talking and is used in that manner while driving.” 15 Veh. Code § 23123.5(a): “A person shall not drive a motor vehicle while holding and operating a handheld wireless telephone or an electronic wireless communications device unless the wireless communications device is specifically designed and configured to allow voice-operated and hands-free operation, and it is used in that manner while driving.” 16 Cf. Ayon v. Esquire Deposition Sols., LLC, 27 Cal. App. 5th 487 (2018) (affirming summary judgment for deposition service company whose employee, while using her cell phone, drove her vehicle into the plaintiff; her conversation was with a company court reporters, but the undisputed testimony was that the conversation was personal only and did not pertain to company business). 17 Solus Indus. Innovations, LLC v. Super. Ct., 4 Cal. 5th 316 (2018). 18 Id. at 346 (“Neither do the UCL or FAL claims obstruct another of the federal OSH Act’s purposes, namely to encourage the States ‘to assume the fullest responsibility for the administration and enforcement of their occupational safety and health laws.’”) (internal citations omitted). 19 Id. at 340 (“Actions to enforce the UCL or FAL, which may be brought by government officials and by individuals who have suffered injury in fact … , address the overarching legislative concern … to provide a streamlined procedure for the prevention of ongoing or threatened acts of unfair competition.”) (internal quotation marks omitted). 20 8 Cal. Code Regs. § 342.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTkwMTQ4