HRFocus Webinar and Compliance Corner Update

California	In Golden Gate Rest. Ass'n v. City & County of San Francisco, No. C06-6997 JSW (N.D. Cal. 2010), a federal district court, following instructions from a federal appellate court, ruled in favor of the City and County of San Francisco in a challenge to the San Francisco "fair-share" law. The law requires employers to make minimum health care expenditures on behalf of their employees. The ruling follows instructions from a federal appellate court decision which upheld the San Francisco law against an ERISA preemption challenge. Therefore, covered employers should note that the fair-share law continues to be in effect. Click here to learn more. Click here to view City & County of San Francisco information.

Delaware	The PPACA included a $250 million grant program to help states review rising health insurance rates. Delaware's proposed program has been approved for a $1 million federal grant. Delaware officials state that they will use the funds to enhance health insurance rate review, transparency and to provide more and better information to the people of Delaware. In addition, the insurance carriers will be required to report more detailed and comprehensive information through a new standardized process to better evaluate proposed rate increases and to increase transparency across the marketplace. The department staff would also receive additional training and the department will be hosting meetings between the insurance carriers and the public. Click here to learn more. On Aug. 31, 2010, Gov. Markell signed into law SB228, combating dishonest health discount cards. The bill will provide a level of protection for the consumer while making it easier to go after fraudulent operations for not having a license rather than the more difficult, expensive and time consuming task of proving fraud. It ensures that entities that offer medical discount plans fully and fairly disclose to the consumer what they are purchasing and applies oversight to the companies by requiring them to be licensed by the Department of Insurance. Click here to learn more.

Illinois	Gov. Pat Quinn announced on Aug. 19, 2010 that enrollment for the Illinois Pre-Existing Condition Insurance plan (IPXP) would begin Aug. 20, 2010; coverage through the plan began Sept. 1, 2010. The federally-funded plan will provide coverage for thousands of Illinois residents who have been denied health coverage due to pre-existing conditions. Click here for more information. Click here to view the IPXP Monthly Premium Table and instructions. Click here to view the IPXP Online Application.

Indiana	Under a new Indiana law, if an employer or any person or entity acting on behalf of an employer files more than twenty-five (25) Form W-2 federal income tax withholding statements with the Indiana Department of State Revenue in a calendar year, they must be filed electronically. This new law applies to Form W-2 federal income tax withholding statements and Form WH-3 annual withholding tax reports that are filed with the Department after Dec. 31, 2010. These changes are codified in a new section of the Indiana Code, at Ind. Code §6-3-4-16.5 Click here to learn more.

Nebraska	Nebraska passed the Employee Classification Act (LB 563), which provides information for determining whether a worker is an employee or an independent contractor. An individual performing delivery services for a contractor - the transportation of and delivery of goods, products, supplies, or raw materials upon state highways - is presumed to be an employee unless: the individual has been and will continue to be free from control or direction over the performance of such services, both under his or her contract of service and in fact; such service is either outside the usual course of the business for which such service is performed or such service is performed outside of all the places of business of the enterprise for which such service is performed; the individual is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, profession, or business. An individual performing construction labor for a contractor - work on real property and annexations, including new work, additions, alterations, reconstruction, installations, and repairs performed at one or more different sites which may be dispersed geographically - is presumed to be an employee unless he or she meets the above requirements and: the individual is registered as a contractor pursuant to the Contractor Registration Act prior to commencing work for the contractor; and the individual has been assigned a combined tax rate, or exempt from unemployment insurance coverage. Employers violating these provisions will be subject to an initial fine of $500 per each misclassified individual, and $5,000 for second and subsequent violations. Click here to learn more. Source: Littler Mendelson Nebraska law requires employers to pay employees on regular paydays. LB 884 requires that within ten working days after an employee makes a written request, an employer must provide that employee with an itemized statement listing all wages earned and deductions made for each pay period. The statement may be in print or electronic formats. Click here to learn more. Source: Littler Mendelson

New York	Effective Oct. 30, 2010, A02563 requires that employers that offer funeral or bereavement leave to employees for the death of a spouse, child, parent or other relative must also provide the same leave for the death of an employee's same-sex committed partner. Partners are defined as those who are financial and emotionally interdependent in a manner commonly presumed of spouses. Click here to learn more. Section 1123 of the New York Insurance Code, which concerns group health insurance for independent workers, has been amended. The definition of independent workers eligible for coverage now includes a domestic child care worker and an individual who works full-time for a single employer on a temporary basis for a period not to exceed 18 months if such employer does not offer group health insurance coverage to temporary employees. Click here to learn more. S01803 requires that group health insurance policies that provide coverage for in-network dialysis treatment also provide coverage for out-of-network dialysis treatment if the following conditions are met: the provider is properly licensed and authorized to provide such treatment; the provider is located outside the insurer's service area; the insured's in-network treating physician states that the dialysis treatment is necessary; and the insured provides notice of the treatment to the insurer at least 30 days prior to the treatment or a shorter period in the case of a family or other emergency. The insurer may require pre-approval and may limit the treatments to 10 per year. Any amount in excess of the carrier's normal benefit payment is the responsibility of the insured. The law is effective for policies issued, renewed, or modified on or after Jan. 1, 2011. Click here to learn more.

Utah	The Utah legislature passed HB 67 that directly contradicts federal requirements under PPACA. The law provides that no person may be required to obtain health insurance coverage and that no individual will be liable for any penalty, assessment, fee, or fine if health insurance coverage is not obtained - thereby directly challenging what is known as the federal reform's "individual mandate" which becomes effective Jan. 1, 2014. Additionally, the law: prohibits state agencies or departments from complying with any provision of federal reform unless detailed reports are submitted to, and authorization is granted by, the Legislature's Business and Labor Interim Committee; and provides that the legislature can pass legislation authorizing or prohibiting the state from complying with federal reform regulations. Click here to learn more. Source: Littler Mendelson

Vermont	HCA Bulletin 131 establishes a transition date for health insurance plans to be in compliance with the revision of 8 V.S.A. § 4089b regarding coverage for mental health and substance abuse. This revision eliminates the provision under Vermont law that currently allows health insurance plans to only offer mental health substance abuse services in-network. The bulletin applies to individual and group policies issued or renewed on or after Jan. 1, 2011. Click here to learn more.

Virginia	Virginia amended its military leave and reemployment rights provisions (S 613). Under the amended law, employers must provide employees the option of continuing, at the employee's expense, health care coverage, life insurance, or long-term care insurance if that employee is a member of the Virginia National Guard who is called to state active duty by the Governor. Employers should therefore revise any benefits policies as applicable to ensure information concerning the availability of benefits during military leave is updated. Click here to learn more. Source: Littler Mendelson Virginia passed H 10 creating a new statute under the state's health laws which directly contradicts the new federal requirements under PPACA. The law provides that no person can be required to obtain health insurance coverage and that no individual will be liable for any penalty, assessment, fee, or fine if health insurance coverage is not obtained - thereby directly challenging what is known as the federal reform's "individual mandate" which becomes effective Jan. 1, 2014. However, there are two exceptions: coverage can be required by state social services or courts (e.g., a family court judgment mandating that a parent procure coverage for dependents); and colleges and universities may require student coverage as a precondition of enrollment. Click here to learn more. Source: Littler Mendelson Virginia amended its provisions concerning reemployment rights of members of the state's National Guard, Defense Force, and naval militia that were called to active state or military duty. Under S 349, qualifying members who were honorably discharged are entitled to reemployment if they make written application to their previous employer within: 14 days of release from duty or hospitalization following release if the length of the member's absence by reason of service in the uniformed services does not exceed 180 days; or 90 days of release from duty or hospitalization following release if the length of the member's absence by reason of service in the uniformed services exceeds 180 days. Click here to learn more. Source: Littler Mendelson In passing House Bill 1039, effective Jan. 1, 2011, Virginia added a security breach notification statute to its health laws. Pursuant to the new law, a business that maintains, owns or licenses computerized data containing medical information and discovers a security breach, or has reason to believe information was accessed without authorization, must, without delay, disclose the breach to the state attorney general and commissioner of health, the subject of the information, any affected resident of Virginia, and the information's owner, if applicable. Businesses sending notice to more than 1,000 people must also notify the state attorney general and commissioner of health of the timing, distribution and content of the notice. However, this does not apply to certain businesses already subject to HIPAA notice requirements, or to non-HIPAA-covered businesses regulated by the Federal Trade Commission. Notice may be delayed to determine the severity of the breach, or if a law enforcement agency determines that providing notice will impede a criminal or civil investigation, or homeland or national security. After the law enforcement agency determines that the notification will no longer impede the investigation or jeopardize national or homeland security, notice is to be made without unreasonable delay. Click here to learn more. Source: Littler Mendelson Virginia passed S 163, which amended its wage payment laws to add health savings accounts (HSAs) to the list of items which are exempt from creditors' claims. Accordingly, the income from HSAs: is exempt from the creditor process is not liable to attachment or garnishment; and cannot be seized, taken, or appropriated to pay any debt or liability of the participant or beneficiary of the account. Click here to learn more. Source: Littler Mendelson