<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Labor and employment roundup	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.overlawyered.com/2019/07/labor-and-employment-roundup-20/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2019/07/labor-and-employment-roundup-20/</link>
	<description>Chronicling the high cost of our legal system</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 05 Jul 2019 02:16:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Canvasback		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2019/07/labor-and-employment-roundup-20/comment-page-1/#comment-355128</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Canvasback]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Jul 2019 02:16:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.overlawyered.com/?p=72640#comment-355128</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Re: Berkeley report on L A housing Measure JJJ
&quot;The report recommends several tweaks to Measure JJJ in order to soften its impacts, including exempting projects seeking to rezone sites specifically zoned for parking, exempting projects seeking to remove decades-old density restrictions, and exempting certain projects in &quot;medium-market&quot; areas which could offer more affordable rents.&quot;

More buildings,  higher density, and higher rents. It&#039;s as if the Berkelites let the developers do their homework for them.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re: Berkeley report on L A housing Measure JJJ<br />
&#8220;The report recommends several tweaks to Measure JJJ in order to soften its impacts, including exempting projects seeking to rezone sites specifically zoned for parking, exempting projects seeking to remove decades-old density restrictions, and exempting certain projects in &#8220;medium-market&#8221; areas which could offer more affordable rents.&#8221;</p>
<p>More buildings,  higher density, and higher rents. It&#8217;s as if the Berkelites let the developers do their homework for them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Melvin H.		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2019/07/labor-and-employment-roundup-20/comment-page-1/#comment-355117</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Melvin H.]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jul 2019 21:35:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.overlawyered.com/?p=72640#comment-355117</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[On paid vacation time:

If I leave a business to go to another, I start at the bottom of any paid vacation benefit.   BUT:  what happens if the business is sold while I’m an employee—the previous business owners has paid vacation but the incoming business owners do not and you lose all vacation time.

So why not this:  if a business is sold to another company and they have different paid vacation policies:

(A). Company selling business has paid vacation, company buying does not:  The company buying must continue the paid vacation policy of the previous company until the last employee from before the purchase has left; however, the amount per employee is frozen at what it was on the day of the sale (I.e. an employee who has four weeks paid vacation yearly would still get it but could not add more vacation time).
Said expense would not count toward total labor costs

(B.).  Company selling has no paid vacation but company buying does:  The employees would slot into the vacation plan where they would had they worked for the new owners all along;  so that if a company after five years gives two weeks’ time off any incoming employees with five years time in would also receive two weeks, just as if they had been there the beginning.....]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On paid vacation time:</p>
<p>If I leave a business to go to another, I start at the bottom of any paid vacation benefit.   BUT:  what happens if the business is sold while I’m an employee—the previous business owners has paid vacation but the incoming business owners do not and you lose all vacation time.</p>
<p>So why not this:  if a business is sold to another company and they have different paid vacation policies:</p>
<p>(A). Company selling business has paid vacation, company buying does not:  The company buying must continue the paid vacation policy of the previous company until the last employee from before the purchase has left; however, the amount per employee is frozen at what it was on the day of the sale (I.e. an employee who has four weeks paid vacation yearly would still get it but could not add more vacation time).<br />
Said expense would not count toward total labor costs</p>
<p>(B.).  Company selling has no paid vacation but company buying does:  The employees would slot into the vacation plan where they would had they worked for the new owners all along;  so that if a company after five years gives two weeks’ time off any incoming employees with five years time in would also receive two weeks, just as if they had been there the beginning&#8230;..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: SPO		</title>
		<link>https://www.overlawyered.com/2019/07/labor-and-employment-roundup-20/comment-page-1/#comment-355110</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[SPO]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jul 2019 13:06:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.overlawyered.com/?p=72640#comment-355110</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Re&quot;  Licensing--what if there&#039;s a mistake and the license gets yanked accidentally?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Re&#8221;  Licensing&#8211;what if there&#8217;s a mistake and the license gets yanked accidentally?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
