For many public companies and non-profit organizations (for ease, we’ll refer to them as ‘organizations’), we’re in the season for meetings, whether it’s a quarterly board meeting or an annual meeting of stockholders or members. With the current inability to gather in groups due to the unprecedented world pandemic, the typical in-person meeting must quickly morph into a virtual or remote-only format.
As states begin to their introduce plans to reopen their economies, employers are understandably anxious about bringing employees back to the physical workplace. While returning to work will look different for each employer, there are several global considerations that all employers should keep in mind.
Reopening Massachusetts Businesses: What to Know About Phase 1
On April 2nd, the In-House Advisor convened a second video conference of General Counsel and Corporate Counsel to discuss how their businesses are dealing with the COVID-19 crisis. As with the prior meeting, the in-house counsel present were from entities ranging from small, local companies, to large, multi-national enterprises. Here are some of the key takeaways from the session:
Working from Home
On April 1, 2020, the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA) will commence and be effective through December 31, 2020 for employers with less than 500 employees in the United States. On March 24, 2020, the DOL issued an informal compliance guide in a Q&A form which provided some clarification on this new legislation. Here are some considerations to keep in mind as employers implement the new leave requirements.
The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) contains a number of provisions that affect federal government loan assistance programs, the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) that administers them, and the private sector lenders that participate in them. Here is a summary of some of the more important changes that the CARES Act makes to current law:
There are several federal, state, and private funding relief alternatives that may be available to provide capital to your small business during the COVID-19 disaster recovery process. Below, you will find answers to frequently asked questions concerning such alternatives.
The rapidly evolving novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic is raising for all of us a number of new and uncharted issues and challenges. For business enterprises, it can impact company culture, business operations and reputation. For most companies, the crisis likely will have more significant ramifications if it’s not managed well. While the issues and answers will differ among companies of different sizes, in diverse industries, and across varied geographic reaches, one common thread is that boards of directors/managers (boards) have oversight challenges in effectively overseeing management’s response. Below are some of our suggestions all boards should consider in facing the COVID-19 pandemic.
This article originally appeared on Citybizlist as part of a series featuring Burns & Levinson attorneys helping businesses and individuals navigate the many challenges that COVID-19 presents.
Business interruption and related forms of insurance coverage are a potential source of relief from some of the devastating economic losses being caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Anticipating claims for coverage, some in the insurance industry are asserting that this insurance won’t cover COVID-19 losses because, in their view, there is no property damage, a typical requirement for coverage. Some state legislators have already proposed legislation which effectively rewrites existing insurance contracts by forcing insurers to cover business interruption claims regardless of contrary policy language. A bill has been introduced in Massachusetts Senate requiring every business interruption policy to be construed to cover income losses directly or indirectly resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic, “notwithstanding the terms of such policy.” Similar legislative efforts are under way in New Jersey and Ohio. The insurance industry will surely challenge these legislative efforts. Restaurant owners have already filed suit in state courts in Louisiana and California seeking declaratory judgments that their policies insure them for loss of income caused by both the virus and the orders of civil authorities. Native American tribes in Oklahoma have already filed suit against their insurers seeking declaratory judgments that their policies cover losses incurred due to the forced closure of their casinos. Given the certainty and magnitude of the business interruption losses arising both out of the pandemic and the resulting governmental orders designed to limit the spread of the virus, below are four steps that all who are impacted should undertaking now.