COVID-19: News and Updates |
| Special #49 - July 7, 2020 |
| |
"We hope you had a great Independence Day."
|
| | Articles and Updates Today
- Constangy.com News & Analysis: Supreme Court of Georgia revises “rest break exception” to workers’ comp: But how Farr did Frett go? By Claire Cronin / Macon Office & Eric Proser / Atlanta Office
7.1.20
- CDC updates, expands list of people at risk of severe COVID-19 illness : Press Release June 25, 2020 - HRDive Article - DOL: Workers whose kids can't attend summer camp can take FFCRA leave AUTHOR Lisa Burden
PUBLISHED June 29, 2020
- Nearly 5 Million Jobs Gained in June, Unemployment Rate Drops Again : Job loss elevated despite employment gains; over 1 million new jobless claims continue to be filed each week By Roy Maurer
- Gov. Kemp Issues Guidance on CARES Act Funding to Georgia Communities JUNE 29, 2020
- Constangy.com Blog: SCOTUS denies cert in Equal Pay Act salary history case BY ROBIN SHEA ON 7.2.20
POSTED IN DISCRIMINATION, EQUAL PAY, PAY EQUITY
- Trump Signs PPP Extension Bill—Giving Small Businesses Another 5 Weeks Sarah Hansen Forbes Staff Jul 4, 2020
- Georgia Department of Public Health COVID-19 Daily Status Report
|
| | | | Constangy.com News & Analysis: Supreme Court of Georgia revises “rest break exception” to workers’ comp: But how Farr did Frett go?
7.1.20
In its June 16 decision in Frett v. State Farm Employee Workers’ Compensation, the Supreme Court of Georgia overruled an 85-year-old decision which held that workplace injuries incurred during “scheduled rest breaks” were not compensable under Georgia workers’ compensation law.
However, the Frett decision does not eliminate the rest break defense entirely. Rather, it eliminates the “automatic” operation of the defense, leaving the analysis to be more focused on traditional “arising out of and in the course of” employment considerations.
The Frett case
The claimant in Frett clocked out, prepared her lunch, and was leaving the break room to go outside to eat, when she slipped in water and fell. Although generally claims that arise while an employee is “going and coming” to or from work are not compensable, there is an exception for claims that arise during “ingress” or “egress” to the workplace. A hearing judge ruled that Ms. Frett’s claim was compensable under the “ingress/egress” exception. The Appellate Division reversed, and the Superior Court affirmed the reversal.
The Georgia Court of Appeals agreed, determining that all “ingress/egress” was part of the break and not a commute, that the “ingress or egress” allowance did not apply to a break, and thus that the entire break was not compensable. The Court of Appeals focused on the fact that the claimant was “free to do as she pleased” and was not under sufficient employer control as to warrant compensability. However, the Court of Appeals recognized that the law involving the rest break defense was unclear, and essentially invited the Supreme Court of Georgia to weigh in.
In its decision issued on June 16, the state Supreme Court held that the injury was compensable, and should not have been automatically dismissed just because it occurred during a scheduled break. According to the Court, Ms. Frett’s injury arose out of and in the course of her employment because she fell on the employer’s premises, as a result of her working conditions, while engaged in a function that was sufficiently “incidental” to her employment, notwithstanding that she was on a break.
The Court overruled its 85-year-old decision in Ocean Accident & Guarantee Corp. v. Farr, which found non-compensable the injury of an employee who fell while he was off the clock and walking to a boiler room where he planned to eat his lunch.
Although the Frett Court overruled Farr, it did not eliminate the possibility that another case with different facts surrounding the “break” would have a different outcome and would not be compensable. The Frett Court was careful to note that “the lack of payment and freedom to act may be significant factors in close cases, where the nature and timing of the employee’s activity at the time of the injury are only tenuously connected to her usual work hours or work-related activities.” (Emphasis added.)
In other words, hearing judges and the courts will now apply a fact-based, case-by-case analysis as to whether the injury “[arose] out of and in the course of” employment rather than automatically denying the claim because the employee was on a scheduled break. The Court found it significant that Ms. “Frett was indeed using her break time to prepare and eat her lunch, not to run some personal errand.” This leaves the door open for supported denials when break time is being used in a manner less “incidental” to work, or more personal or disconnected from work.
What now?
Although Frett’s elimination of the automatic “break defense” is significant, it is not earth shattering and it is not the final word. The Frett Court seemed to take pains to minimize the significance of its overruling of Farr:
Farr is more than 85 years old. Notwithstanding its age, however, it would be hard to assert with a straight face that Farr has become deeply entrenched in our jurisprudence . . . we have not cited Farr for any proposition at all in the past 60 years. Although the Court of Appeals occasionally has relied on Farr to reject a claim for compensation under the Act, it more frequently and more recently has devised rules and exceptions that have effectively limited the precedential effect of Farr narrowly to its facts. Until the decision of the Court of Appeals in Frett below, jurisprudential reliance on Farr was limited at best . . . at least until the Frett decision below, no employer or employee could tell for certain whether an injury occurring in the employer’s break room or during lunch hour would be covered under the Act—it all depended on the particular facts of each individual case.
Thus, this issue is not resolved. Until very recently, there was a pending case in which the claimant was injured while on a lunch break, but off the employer’s premises. The Frett Court’s discussion indicates that the employer in this case may still have a valid defense. This specific case may have settled, but there will be more “break” cases with facts that show the injury was not “incidental” to work but rather separate, and not arising out of or in the course of employment.
In summary, the Frett Court has not abandoned the basic concept that a claim is not compensable if it does not arise out of and in the course of employment, and that an injury incurred while the employee is on a break may not meet that criteria. A claim will no longer be automatically denied simply because the employee was on a break when the injury occurred. Presumably, if the employee is on the employer’s premises during the break and engaging in ordinary incidental activities such as eating lunch, the claim is likely to be compensable. Farr went too far. Frett hopes not to go too far in the other direction.
For a printer-friendly copy, click here.
|
|
| | CDC updates, expands list of people at risk of severe COVID-19 illness
Press ReleaseJ une 25, 2020
Contact: Media Relations (404) 639-3286
Based on a detailed review of available evidence to date, CDC has updated and expanded the list of who is at increased risk for getting severely ill from COVID-19.
Older adults and people with underlying medical conditions remain at increased risk for severe illness, but now CDC has further defined age- and condition-related risks.
As more information becomes available, it is clear that a substantial number of Americans are at increased risk of severe illness – highlighting the importance of continuing to follow preventive measures.
“Understanding who is most at risk for severe illness helps people make the best decisions for themselves, their families, and their communities,” said CDC Director Robert Redfield MD. “While we are all at risk for COVID-19, we need to be aware of who is susceptible to severe complications so that we take appropriate measures to protect their health and well-being.”
COVID-19 risk related to age
CDC has removed the specific age threshold from the older adult classification. CDC now warns that among adults, risk increases steadily as you age, and it’s not just those over the age of 65 who are at increased risk for severe illness.
Recent data, including an MMWR published last week, has shown that the older people are, the higher their risk of severe illness from COVID-19. Age is an independent risk factor for severe illness, but risk in older adults is also in part related to the increased likelihood that older adults also have underlying medical conditions.
COVID-19 risk related to underlying medical conditions
CDC also updated the list of underlying medical conditions that increase risk of severe illness after reviewing published reports, pre-print studies, and various other data sources. CDC experts then determined if there was clear, mixed, or limited evidence that the condition increased a person’s risk for severe illness, regardless of age.
There was consistent evidence (from multiple small studies or a strong association from a large study) that specific conditions increase a person’s risk of severe COVID-19 illness:
- Chronic kidney disease
- COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease)
- Obesity (BMI of 30 or higher)
- Immunocompromised state (weakened immune system) from solid organ transplant
- Serious heart conditions, such as heart failure, coronary artery disease, or cardiomyopathies
- Sickle cell disease
- Type 2 diabetes
These changes increase the number of people who fall into higher risk groups. An estimated 60 percent of American adults have at least one chronic medical condition. Obesity is one of the most common underlying conditions that increases one’s risk for severe illness – with about 40 percent of U.S. adults having obesity. The more underlying medical conditions people have, the higher their risk.
CDC also clarified the list of other conditions that might increase a person’s risk of severe illness, including additions such as asthma, high blood pressure, neurologic conditions such as dementia, cerebrovascular disease such as stroke, and pregnancy. An MMWR published today further adds to the growing body of research on risk by comparing data on pregnant and nonpregnant women with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Pregnant women were significantly more likely to be hospitalized, admitted to the intensive care unit, and receive mechanical ventilation than nonpregnant women; however, pregnant women were not at greater risk for death from COVID-19.
Protecting yourself, your family, and your community
Every activity that involves contact with others has some degree of risk right now. Knowing if you are at increased risk for severe illness and understanding the risks associated with different activities of daily living can help you make informed decisions about which activities to resume and what level of risk you will accept. This information is especially critical as communities begin to reopen.
Everyone should continue to do their part to implement prevention strategies, such as focusing on activities where social distancing can be maintained, washing your hands frequently, limiting contact with and disinfecting commonly touched surfaces or shared items, and wearing a cloth face covering when you are around people you do not live with, especially when it is difficult to stay 6 feet apart or when people are indoors. By taking these steps, you can help protect yourself, your loved ones, and others around you, including those most vulnerable to severe illness.
CDC will continue to update and share information about risk for severe illness as more information becomes available. For more information on how to prevent getting sick with COVID-19, visit CDC’s website at https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/index.html.
###
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICE
CDC works 24/7 protecting America’s health, safety and security. Whether disease start at home or abroad, are curable or preventable, chronic or acute, or from human activity or deliberate attack, CDC responds to America’s most pressing health threats. CDC is headquartered in Atlanta and has experts located throughout the United States and the world
|
| | | |
HRDive Article - DOL: Workers whose kids can't attend summer camp can take FFCRA leave AUTHOR Lisa Burden PUBLISHED June 29, 2020
Dive Brief:
• Employees can take paid leave under the Family First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA) to care for their children in instances where a child's summer camp or summer program has been shuttered due to the pandemic, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) said in a June 26 field assistance bulletin.
• The federal agency said a closed summer camp or program may be considered the place of care for an employee's child if the child was enrolled in the camp or program before the closure. It noted that "affirmative steps" short of actual enrollment may suffice to prove the summer program was intended to be a child's place of care.
• A summer camp or program qualifies as closed for the purpose of an employee qualifying for FFCRA leave if the camp or program is operating at a reduced capacity because of COVID-19, the agency said. For children who would have attended, the same analysis — actual enrollment or affirmative steps toward enrollment — applies.
Dive Insight:
The Labor Department said in the bulletin that "the expectation that employees take FFCRA leave based on planned summer enrollments is not different from the closing of other places of care such as a day care center." DOL says it is not adopting a one-size-fits all rule because of "the multitude of possible circumstances under which an employee may establish (1) a plan to send his or her child to a summer camp or program, or (2) that even though the employee had no such plan at the time the summer camp or program closed due to COVID-19, his or her child would have nevertheless attended the camp or program had it not closed."
If proof of a child's summer camp enrollment is not available, DOL provided several examples of ways that parents can prove a child's planned attendance in a summer program, such as:
- Proof of the submission of an application before the camp's closure.
- Proof of a paid deposit.
- Proof of prior attendance and current eligibility.
- Proof of being on a waitlist.
The agency also said that an employee who requests FFCRA leave must provide the employer information in support of the need for leave either orally or in writing. Such an explanation must include the reason for leave and a statement that the employee is unable to work because of that reason. |
| | | | |  |
Nearly 5 Million Jobs Gained in June, Unemployment Rate Drops Again : Job loss elevated despite employment gains; over 1 million new jobless claims continue to be filed each week
By Roy Maurer
July 2, 2020 T he U.S. economy showed positive job gains for the second straight month in June, adding 4.8 million jobs, and the unemployment rate fell to an approximate 12 percent (after being adjusted for a misclassification error) from an adjusted 16.4 percent in May, according to the latest report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). A significant rebound was reported in industries such as leisure and hospitality and retail, sectors that once experienced the greatest job losses, as the economy slowly continues to recover. But the reporting was conducted in mid-June, meaning recent developments, like the surge in coronavirus cases and business closures in some states, aren't yet captured in the data.
The gains reflect a partial resumption of economic activity that had been paused due to the COVID-19 pandemic, when employment fell by a total of 22 million in March and April alone.
"The U.S. labor market roared back to life in June, however, today's report is an already-outdated look in the rearview mirror," said Andrew Chamberlain, chief economist at Glassdoor. "With surging COVID-19 cases hitting new highs in California, Texas and Florida in the past week, this report arrives against the ominous backdrop of a second wave that could shutter millions of American small businesses and put a freeze on hiring."
The report can be deceiving, agreed Nick Bunker, an economist at the Indeed Hiring Lab. "Almost 5 million jobs were added, but the pace of job creation is almost certainly not going to keep up. The damage done to the labor market is still staggering, with employment still 10 percent below February's numbers. Yes, the unemployment rate might have declined, but workers are still losing jobs and signs point toward more and more of these losses becoming permanent."
It's a case of surface good news masking underlying bad news, said Josh Wright, chief economist at Wrightside Advisors, an economic research and consulting firm based in New York City. "Temporary jobs continued to rush back in—and faster than median expectations—providing another leg of the hoped-for V-shape in the recovery. But there are problems lurking, starting with job losses being increasingly permanent. While the initial tsunami of temporary job losses is receding, the permanent job losses are rising. As many of the more thoughtful analysts have noted, the true recessionary dynamic is still in the early stages as the natural-disaster dynamic continues to recede."
June Hiring Swelled at Bars, Restaurants
The strong employment gains were driven by robust hiring in the leisure and hospitality sector, with 2.1 million jobs added, accounting for about 40 percent of the total gained for the month. Bars and restaurants added 1.5 million new jobs to payroll, coming in still about 3 million behind where they were before the pandemic.
"While it's great to see job growth in the sector that was directly in the line of the coronavirus, leisure and hospitality employment is still 29 percent below pre-pandemic levels," Bunker said. "With virus cases spiking and businesses potentially closing once again, these gains in employment may not be sustainable moving forward."
These are the same industries being hit hard in the past two weeks by new closings, as rising virus cases shutter bars and restrict restaurant service in the states that reopened first.
Hiring in June was strong in nearly every sector of the economy however, with gains made in retail (740,000 new jobs), manufacturing (356,000 new jobs), health care (358,000 new jobs) and professional services (306,000 new jobs).
"ManpowerGroup's real time data also gives us cause for optimism—from June to July we've seen nearly a doubling of new jobs posted," said Becky Frankiewicz, president of ManpowerGroup North America. "We're seeing hiring for essential roles related to COVID-19 continue to transition to hiring that enables people and companies to adapt for our new future. Retail, including grocery, led all jobs available as markets reopened. We are also seeing promise in some significantly impacted sectors like hospitality improving from less than 1 percent of available jobs to 8.6 percent of available jobs, showing some Americans are starting to take advantage of eating out and other forms of leisure."
That's consistent with real-time hiring trends from Glassdoor's Job Market Report, "which shows strong hiring in June in travel and tourism, consumer services, arts and entertainment and other sectors hit hard by the first wave of COVID-19 that began reopening last month in many states," Chamberlain said. "One powerful revelation from today's jobs report is how swiftly U.S. job growth can bounce back once officials give employers the green light on reopening," he added. "June's figures are a litmus test for how rapidly businesses can reopen once the nation finally brings the coronavirus under control—a reason for optimism in coming months."
Some sectors are still hurting, noted Julia Pollak, a labor economist at online employment marketplace ZipRecruiter. She said there are still many industries shedding jobs, such as state government (-25,000), nursing and residential care facilities (-20,000), local government minus education (-14,000), mining and logging (-10,000), travel and reservation services (-7,600), and air and rail transportation (-6,000).
The labor market has likely deteriorated even more by now, she added. "The number of new jobs posted on ZipRecruiter plummeted 51 percent in April, rose 14 percent in May, but declined in June, a sign that the hiring outlook remains deeply uncertain."
Unemployment Falls, Job Loss Still High
The official unemployment rate dropped to 11.1 percent from 13.3 percent but correcting for misclassification errors place it at about 12 percent, down from over 16 percent, according to the BLS. "That's an improvement, but still worse than the depths of the Great Recession," Wright said. "And with jobless claims stagnating at historic levels, there's little reason to expect a quick improvement any time soon."
He pointed out that the U-6 underemployment rate is at 18 percent, below the all-time high of nearly 23 percent in April, but much higher than February's 7 percent. "And don't forget that labor force participation remains 3 million below what it was in February."
Despite signs of elevated layoffs, the decline in the unemployment rate is highly encouraging, Pollak said. "So is the 1.5 million decline in the number of people working part-time for economic reasons. The number of workers on temporary layoff declined by almost 5 million, another strong sign of recovery. It suggests workers are being recalled to their jobs in large numbers."
But sadly, the number of permanent job losses also continued to rise, growing by 588,000, she said. "With so many people being permanently laid off at once, the labor market is becoming intensely competitive for job seekers."
Pollak said that it's also important to remember that the unemployment figures don't capture the full extent of the pandemic's labor market disruption. "The labor force has declined by 4.6 million since February. It could take years for them to come back off the sidelines. Some have likely exited the labor force permanently. And the crisis has affected some groups of workers more severely. The unemployment rate for workers in service occupations is 19 percent. And while employment levels rebounded 3.8 percent for white workers and 6.3 percent for Hispanic workers, they only rose 2.4 percent for black workers."
Initial Jobless Claims Fall, Continuing Claims Rise
States reported that about 1.4 million U.S. workers filed for new unemployment benefits during the week ending June 27. First-time claims have fallen for 13 straight weeks since hitting a record 6.8 million in late March. The total number of workers continuing to claim unemployment benefits held at 19 million last week after peaking at nearly 25 million in early May.
"Continuing claims are a concerning signal that the recovery may not have enough economic momentum to bulldoze through any obstacles," said Daniel Zhao, Glassdoor senior economist. "The more timely unemployment insurance claims data signals the recovery is continuing sluggishly even as COVID-19 cases climb across the country, but the second wave of cases raises the specter of a second wave of economic disruption."
Another 12.8 million people continue to claim unemployment under the newly created Pandemic Unemployment Assistance program providing jobless benefits to workers previously not eligible for unemployment. "That means there are still more people filing claims each week than the number of jobs added all 2019," Pollak said.
Chamberlain said that the employment reporting in July "could feel like Groundhog's Day, if states reinstate shelter-in-place and business closures that'd result in higher unemployment and jobs losses." Any losses would likely be smaller than April's freefall however, "as states apply lessons and take a smarter, more targeted approach to the pandemic," he said.
******
U.S. Department of Labor July 2, 2020
Payroll employment increased by 4.8 million in June, exceeding expectations, according to data released today by BLS. The U.S. economy saw widespread job gains. The unemployment rate fell by 2.2% during the month.
******* More on Unemployment numbers from GEA's HR answers now
¶47,108 Unemployment drops to 11.1 percent in June, but that is still 7.6 percent higher than it was before pandemic — SURVEY RESULTS,(Jul. 6, 2020)
Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 4.8 million in June, and the unemployment rate declined by 2.2 percentage points to 11.1 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported July 2. The number of unemployed persons fell by 3.2 million to 17.8 million. Although unemployment fell in May and June, the jobless rate and the number of unemployed are up by 7.6 percentage points and 12.0 million, respectively, since February. These numbers reflect the continued resumption of economic activity that had been curtailed in March and April due to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic and efforts to contain it.
In June, nonfarm employment was 14.7 million, or 9.6 percent, lower than its February level. Employment in leisure and hospitality rose sharply (+2.1 million), accounting for about two-fifths of the gain in total nonfarm employment. Notable job gains also occurred in retail trade (+740,000), education and health services (+568,000), other services (+357,000), manufacturing (+356,000), professional and business services (+306,000), construction (+158,000), transportation and warehousing (+99,000), wholesale trade (+68,000), government (+33,000), and financial activities (+32,000). Mining continued to lose jobs in June (-10,000).
Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rates declined in June for adult men (10.2 percent), adult women (11.2 percent), teenagers (23.2 percent), Whites (10.1 percent), Blacks (15.4 percent), and Hispanics (14.5 percent). The jobless rate for Asians (13.8 percent) changed little over the month.
The number of unemployed persons who were on temporary layoff decreased by 4.8 million in June to 10.6 million, following a decline of 2.7 million in May. The number of permanent job losers continued to rise, increasing by 588,000 to 2.9 million in June. The number of unemployed reentrants to the labor force rose by 711,000 to 2.4 million. (Reentrants are persons who previously worked but were not in the labor force prior to beginning their job search.)
The number of unemployed persons who were jobless less than 5 weeks declined by 1.0 million to 2.8 million in June. Unemployed persons who were jobless 5 to 14 weeks numbered 11.5 million, down by 3.3 million over the month, and accounted for 65.2 percent of the unemployed. By contrast, the number of persons jobless 15 to 26 weeks and the long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or more) saw over-the-month increases (+825,000 to 1.9 million and +227,000 to 1.4 million, respectively).
The labor force participation rate increased by 0.7 percentage point in June to 61.5 percent, but is 1.9 percentage points below its February level. Total employment, as measured by the household survey, rose by 4.9 million to 142.2 million in June. The employment-population ratio, at 54.6 percent, rose by 1.8 percentage points over the month but is 6.5 percentage points lower than in February.
In June, the number of persons who usually work full time increased by 2.4 million to 118.9 million, and the number who usually work part time also rose by 2.4 million to 23.2 million.
The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons declined by 1.6 million to 9.1 million in June but is still more than double its February level. These individuals, who would have preferred full-time employment, were working part time because their hours had been reduced or they were unable to find full-time jobs. This group includes persons who usually work full time and persons who usually work part time.
The number of persons not in the labor force who currently want a job, at 8.2 million, declined by 767,000 in June but remained 3.2 million higher than in February. These individuals were not counted as unemployed because they were not actively looking for work during the last 4 weeks or were unavailable to take a job.
Persons marginally attached to the labor force--a subset of persons not in the labor force who currently want a job--numbered 2.5 million in June, little different from the prior month. These individuals were not in the labor force, wanted and were available for work, and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months but had not looked for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey. Discouraged workers, a subset of the marginally attached who believed that no jobs were available for them, numbered 681,000 in June, essentially unchanged from the previous month.
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
|
| | | Gov. Kemp Issues Guidance on CARES Act Funding to Georgia Communities
JUNE 29, 2020
Atlanta, GA - Today Governor Brian P. Kemp issued the following correspondence to all city and county leaders regarding the distribution of federal Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act funding: Link to Governor Kemp's Press Release
|
| | | Constangy.com Blog: SCOTUS denies cert in Equal Pay Act salary history case
POSTED IN DISCRIMINATION, EQUAL PAY, PAY EQUITY
Too bad.
The U.S. Supreme Court declined to review a lower-court decision saying that salary history is not a "legitimate factor other than sex" that justifies a pay differential, and therefore that use of salary history violates the federal Equal Pay Act.
In Yovino v. Rizo, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled in 2018 that the use of salary history violated the EPA. Then, in a bizarre twist, the Supreme Court vacated that decision because the Ninth Circuit judge who wrote the opinion died before the opinion was issued, and there were not enough remaining judges agreeing with him to create a majority.
After the case was sent back to the Ninth Circuit, that court essentially affirmed the 2018 ruling. The employer then petitioned the Supreme Court for certiorari.
Today the Supreme Court denied the employer's petition, which means the Ninth Circuit decision will remain in place. Although the decision applies only in the Ninth Circuit states of Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington (and Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands), employers everywhere are urged to be cautious when using salary history as a factor in determining pay. In addition to concerns under the federal Equal Pay Act, many states have enacted legislation saying that use of salary history violates their state equal pay laws.
|
| | | Trump Signs PPP Extension Bill—Giving Small Businesses Another 5 Weeks
By Sarah Hansen Forbes Staff July 4, 2020
TOPLINE
President Trump Saturday signed into law a bill extending the Paycheck Protection Program—an emergency federal loan facility for small businesses struggling because of the pandemic—for another five weeks until August 8, buying Congress time to figure out what the next round of aid for small businesses will look like when it reconvenes later this month to hash out more stimulus legislation.
KEY FACTS
The PPP was originally slated to close down last Tuesday.
The Senate unexpectedly approved the new legislation by unanimous consent on Tuesday evening, and the House followed suit on Wednesday.
Some $130 billion in loan money allocated to the $670 billion program remains unspent.
When Congress returns from its July 4th holiday recess, it must figure out how to allocate the remaining money and determine the next steps for federal aid to small businesses.
Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin has said that the next round of small business aid will need to be “more targeted” to the specific industries that are struggling the most, like hotels and restaurants.
Another popular Democratic proposal would allow businesses with fewer than 100 employees to take out a second PPP loan from the remaining funds.
BIG NUMBER
4.8 million. As of June 27, that’s how many PPP loans had been approved. All in, those loans were worth nearly $520 billion.
KEY BACKGROUND
The PPP was created as part of the $2.2 trillion CARES Act, signed into law by President Trump at the end of March. The $350 billion program provided forgivable loans to cover payroll and overhead expenses for cash-strapped businesses to keep them from folding during the worst of the economic slowdown. After an initial crush of applications and a chaotic rollout period, the PPP ran out of money in just two weeks, prompting Congress to pass more legislation to re-up the facility with another $310 billion.
|
| | | | Georgia Department of Public Health COVID-19 Daily Status Report For: 06/03/2020 Updated 3pm daily
|
| | | | | Mark Your Calenders
Georgia Employers' Association's 2020 Annual Conference at The Westin Harbor Golf Resort and Spa
Conference will be held on September 27 – 29, 2020
Title: 2020 Vision - A Decade for Change
Please contact us if you have any questions. Registration will start soon. |
| |
Georgia Employers' Association |
|
|
| |
