New York State’s Paid-Sick-Leave Law Takes Effect Sept. 30

New York State will soon require all employers to provide sick leave to employees. The New York State Sick Leave (NYSSL) law goes into effect on Sept. 30, but employees are not entitled to use NYSSL until Jan. 1, 2021.

Key Points of the New Law

The amount of NYSSL employees will be entitled to use will vary by employer size and income:

Employers with at least 100 employees must provide 56 hours of paid sick leave.
Employers with fewer than 100 employees must provide 40 hours of paid sick leave.
Employers with fewer than five employees and a net income in excess of $1 million in the previous tax year must provide 40 hours of paid sick leave.
Employers with fewer than five employees and a net income of less than $1 million in the previous tax year must provide 40 hours of unpaid sick leave.

NYSSL will accrue at a rate of one hour of every 30 hours worked, unless an employer elects to frontload all sick time at the beginning of the year.

Employers may set a reasonable minimum increment for use, which cannot exceed four hours.

NYSSL can be used for:

Employee’s mental or physical illness or injury or diagnosis, care, treatment, or preventive care for employee’s mental or physical illness or injury.
Covered family member’s mental or physical illness or injury or diagnosis, care, treatment, or preventive care for a covered family member’s mental or physical illness or injury.
Absences related to employee’s status as a victim of domestic violence, family offense, sexual offense, stalking or human trafficking.
Absences related to a covered family member’s status as a victim of domestic violence, family offense, sexual offense, stalking or human trafficking.

The term “family member” is broadly defined under the NYSSL to include an employee’s child (biological, adopted or foster child; a legal ward; or a child of an employee standing in loco parentis), spouse, domestic partner, parent (biological, foster, step or adoptive parent; legal guardian; or person who stood in loco parentis when the employee was a minor child), sibling, grandchild, or grandparent, and the child or parent of an employee’s spouse or domestic partner.

Unused sick leave must be carried over to the following year.

Employees may request in writing or verbally that an employer provide a summary of the amount of sick leave accrued and used by the employee, which the employer must provide within 3 business days of the request.

Employers may not require employees to disclose any confidential information in verifying the need for NYSSL.

Employees have a right to reinstatement and protections against retaliation for exercising rights under the NYSSL.

While the labor commissioner is empowered to adopt regulations and to issue guidance on the NYSSL, no such guidance has been issued to date.

Employers in New York City and Westchester County, both of which have their own sick leave laws, await further guidance as to how the NYSSL will interact with existing requirements. This will be particularly challenging for employers in Westchester County, where there is a separate Safe Leave Law.

While employees may not be able to use NYSSL until Jan. 1, 2021, the law goes into effect Sept. 30. Practically, this means that employers selecting an accrual method must be prepared to start tracking accrual, provide information upon request regarding accrual, and be prepared to carry over accrued time for employee use starting Jan. 1, 2021.

[Looking for state-specific information? See State & Local Updates]

Additionally, while nothing in the law requires employers to pay out unused sick time upon employment separation, employers should review their handbooks to ensure their pay out policies are clear on the subject.

Significantly, the NYSSL is separate and distinct from the New York State Quarantine Leave Law, which went into effect on March 18. It remains unclear how these two laws will interact in 2021. However, based on the fact the New York State Quarantine Leave Law is a benefit that employers must provide in addition to standard paid sick leave, the expectation is these leave entitlements will not run concurrently.

Specific Technologies Driving Insurtech Investment in 2024

Understanding the Funding Decline The decrease in funding does not necessarily spell trouble for the insurance sector but instead highlights a strategic shift, the report suggests. “The insurance industry, like many sectors, is focusing on the most promising ventures with substantial insurance potential,” the report explains. “Insurers are directing their investments toward key areas and current trends such as embedded insurance, employee benefits, and cyber risk management. This strategic investment approach signals a forward-looking mindset within the industry.” Three Key Insurtech Trends for 2024 The report identifies three major trends shaping insurtech investments in 2024: Public Insurtech Companies: Financial and Growth Strategies The report also notes that public insurtech companies are prioritizing revenue growth as their main goal. These firms are restructuring their financial strategies to boost cash flow and capitalize on rising revenue streams. Their growth prospects are supported by expanding asset portfolios and strong market demand. “Public insurtech companies are focusing on revenue growth and optimizing their financial frameworks to increase cash flow,” the report states. “The growth potential for these companies is driven by increasing revenue opportunities, broadening asset bases, and a robust market for their services.” In summary, while global insurtech funding saw a decline in 2023, the industry’s focus on GenAI, digital process management, and connected insurance technologies is setting the stage for a dynamic and forward-looking 2024.

Business

Insurer Secures Unanimous Supreme Court Victory in New York Choice of Law Dispute

In the world of sports, a clean sweep, a shutout, or a perfect game is the ultimate achievement. In the legal arena, a unanimous decision from the U.S. Supreme Court is equally rare and significant. In a notable legal triumph, Great Lakes Insurance SE achieved a unanimous 9-0 victory in the Supreme Court on February 21, 2024. This victory follows a protracted legal battle that began in the District Court of Pennsylvania, advanced to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, and culminated in the Supreme Court’s decisive ruling. Background of the Case: Great Lakes Insurance SE v. Raiders Retreat Realty Company The heart of the dispute was the insurance contract’s clause selecting New York law to govern any future legal conflicts. Although the financial implications of this case were relatively minor compared to the broader marine insurance industry, the insurer’s determination to uphold a crucial maritime legal principle has significant long-term implications for marine insurance. Faced with the insured’s counterclaims—including allegations of breach of fiduciary duty, insurance bad faith, and violations of Pennsylvania’s Unfair Trade Practices Law—the insurer was confronted with serious risks. Such claims could lead to the shifting of attorney’s fees, treble damages, and more, which might normally encourage insurers to settle rather than risk pursuing justice. However, Great Lakes Insurance, supported by The Goldman Maritime Law Group, opted to challenge the Third Circuit’s decision and seek clarity from the Supreme Court. Supreme Court Ruling: A Landmark Decision In a landmark ruling, Justice Brett Kavanaugh affirmed that choice of law provisions in maritime contracts should be upheld by default. This ruling is a major victory for establishing a consistent federal standard in maritime law and avoiding a patchwork of state laws that could complicate marine insurance disputes. The Supreme Court’s decision overturned the Third Circuit’s earlier judgment, which had questioned whether Pennsylvania’s public policy concerns might override the insurance contract’s choice of New York law. By upholding the New York choice of law clause, the Supreme Court eliminated the extra-contractual bad faith claims under Pennsylvania law, thereby ensuring that the dispute could be resolved based on the merits of the insurance claim itself. Significance of the Supreme Court’s Decision This ruling represents a significant advancement in maritime law, affirming that choice of law clauses in maritime contracts are generally enforceable. The decision establishes a clear, uniform legal framework for resolving maritime contract disputes, which will streamline the process and ensure fair adjudication of future insurance claims. Justice Clarence Thomas’s concurring opinion was particularly notable for its criticism of the 1955 Wilburn Boat v. Fireman’s Fund Insurance decision, which had previously influenced maritime insurance law. Thomas argued that Wilburn Boat was incorrectly decided and stressed that a uniform and enforceable set of rules is essential for the development of maritime law. Impact on the Marine Insurance Industry The Supreme Court’s decision sets a “bright-line” rule affirming that choice of law clauses are valid unless there is a strong argument against the selected jurisdiction. By endorsing New York’s insurance laws as a reasonable choice, the ruling supports a more consistent and predictable legal environment for marine insurers. This decision represents a major step forward in maritime law, helping insurers better assess risks, determine premiums, and ensure fair and efficient resolution of maritime insurance disputes.

New York State’s Paid-Sick-Leave Law Takes Effect Sept. 30