2021 Open Enrollment Checklist

To prepare for open enrollment, group health plan sponsors should be aware of the legal changes affecting the design and administration of their plans for plan years beginning on or after Jan. 1, 2021. Employers should review their plan documents to confirm that they include these required changes.

In addition, any changes to a health plan’s benefits for the 2021 plan year should be communicated to plan participants through an updated summary plan description (SPD) or a summary of material modifications (SMM). Health plan sponsors should also confirm that their open enrollment materials contain certain required participant notices, when applicable—for example, the summary of benefits and coverage (SBC). There are also some participant notices that must be provided annually or upon initial enrollment. To minimize costs and streamline administration, employers should consider including these notices in their open enrollment materials.

Links and Resources

Plan Design Changes

ACA Affordability Standard

Under the ACA’s employer shared responsibility rules, applicable large employers (ALEs) are required to offer affordable, minimum value health coverage to their full-time employees (and dependent children) or risk paying a penalty. These employer shared responsibility requirements are also known as the “employer mandate” or “pay or play” rules.

Under the ACA, an ALE’s health coverage is considered affordable if the employee’s required contribution to the plan does not exceed 9.5% of the employee’s household income for the taxable year (as adjusted each year). The adjusted percentage is 9.78% for 2020.

For plan years that begin on or after Jan. 1, 2021, the affordability percentage is 9.83%. This means that employer-sponsored coverage for the 2021 plan year will be considered affordable under the employer shared responsibility rules if the employee’s required contribution for self-only coverage does not exceed 9.83% of the employee’s household income for the tax year.

✓ If you are an ALE, confirm that at least one of the health plans offered to full-time employees (and their dependent children) satisfies the ACA’s affordability standard (9.83% for 2021 plan years). Because the affordability percentage increased from 2020 when it was 9.78%, employers may have additional flexibility in setting their employee contributions for 2021 to avoid a penalty under the pay or play rules.

Out-of-Pocket Maximum

Non-grandfathered health plans are subject to limits on cost sharing for essential health benefits (EHB). The annual limit on total enrollee cost sharing for EHB for plan years beginning on or after Jan. 1, 2021, is $8,550 for self-only coverage and $17,100 for family coverage.

✓ Review your plan’s out-of-pocket maximum to make sure it complies with the ACA’s limits for the 2021 plan year ($8,550 for self-only coverage and $17,100 for family coverage).

✓ If you have a high deductible health plan (HDHP) that is compatible with a health savings account (HSA), keep in mind that your plan’s out-of-pocket maximum must be lower than the ACA’s limit. For 2021 plan years, the out-of-pocket maximum limit for HDHPs is $7,000 for self-only coverage and $14,000 for family coverage.

✓ If your plan uses multiple service providers to administer benefits, confirm that the plan coordinates all claims for EHB across the plan’s service providers or divides the out-of-pocket maximum across the categories of benefits, with a combined limit that does not exceed the maximum for 2021.

Preventative Care Benefits

The ACA requires non-grandfathered health plans to cover certain preventive health services without imposing cost-sharing requirements (that is, deductibles, copayments or coinsurance) for the services. Health plans are required to adjust their first-dollar coverage of preventive care services based on the latest preventive care recommendations. If you have a non-grandfathered plan, you should confirm that your plan covers the latest recommended preventive care services without imposing any cost sharing.

More information on the recommended preventive care services is available through the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force and www.HealthCare.gov.

Health FSA Contributions

The ACA imposes a dollar limit on employees’ salary reduction contributions to a health flexible spending account (FSA) offered under a cafeteria plan. An employer may impose its own dollar limit on employees’ salary reduction contributions to a health FSA, as long as the employer’s limit does not exceed the ACA’s maximum limit in effect for the plan year.

The ACA set the health FSA contribution limit at $2,500. For years after 2013, the dollar limit is indexed for cost-of-living adjustments. For 2020 plan years, the health FSA limit is $2,750. The IRS has not yet announced the health FSA limit for 2021 plan years.

✓ Watch for IRS guidance on the health FSA limit for 2021 plan years.

✓ Once the 2021 health FSA limit is announced, confirm that your health FSA will not allow employees to make pre-tax contributions in excess of that limit.

✓ Communicate the health FSA limit to employees as part of the open enrollment process.

HDHP and HSA Limits for 2021

If you offer an HDHP to your employees that is compatible with an HSA, you should confirm that the HDHP’s minimum deductible and out-of-pocket maximum comply with the 2021 limits. The IRS limits for HSA contributions and HDHP maximum out-of-pocket limit increase for 2021. The HSA contribution limits will increase effective Jan. 1, 2021, while the HDHP out-of-pocket limit will increase effective for plan years beginning on or after Jan. 1, 2021.

✓ Check whether your HDHP’s cost-sharing limits need to be adjusted for the 2021 limits.

✓ If you communicate the HSA contribution limits to employees as part of the enrollment process, these enrollment materials should be updated to reflect the increased limits that apply for 2021.

The following table contains the HDHP and HSA limits for 2021 as compared to 2020. It also includes the catch-up contribution limit that applies to HSA-eligible individuals who are age 55 or older, which is not adjusted for inflation and stays the same from year to year.

Additional HRA Design Options

Employers have two additional health reimbursement arrangement (HRA) design options for plan years that begin on or after Jan. 1, 2020—an individual coverage HRA (ICHRA) and an excepted benefit HRA (EBHRA).

✓ Review the additional HRA design options and decide whether to adopt either of these options for your employees (or a group of your employees).

✓ If you adopt an ICHRA for 2021, provide the required employee notice at least 90 days before the beginning of the plan year.

Wellness Plan Design – ADA Compliance

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) applies to employer-sponsored wellness plans that ask for health information or include medical exams (for example, biometric testing). In May 2016, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) issued final rules addressing the ADA’s requirements for employer-sponsored wellness programs. The final rules included a 30% limit for wellness incentives. A federal court vacated this incentive limit, effective Jan. 1, 2019. Consistent with this court ruling, the EEOC removed the incentive limit from its final wellness rules.

Due to the lack of guidance from the EEOC, it is currently unclear what level of incentive, if any, is permissible under the ADA for employer-sponsored wellness plans that ask for health information or include medical exams.

✓ If you sponsor a wellness program that asks for health information or includes medical exams, you should carefully review any incentive associated with the program (due to the lack of guidance from the EEOC).

✓ Watch for any developments related to the EEOC’s wellness rules.

✓ If the EEOC issues proposed wellness rules before the start of the 2021 plan year, review your wellness incentives and consider whether to make any adjustments.

ACA Disclosure Requirements

Summary of Benefits and Coverage

The ACA requires health plans and health insurance issuers to provide an SBC to applicants and enrollees to help them understand their coverage and make coverage decisions. Plans and issuers must provide the SBC to participants and beneficiaries who enroll or re-enroll during an open enrollment period. The SBC also must be provided to participants and beneficiaries who enroll other than through an open enrollment period (including those who are newly eligible for coverage and special enrollees).

On Nov. 8, 2019, the Departments of Labor (DOL) and Health and Human Services (HHS) issued an updated template and related materials for the SBC. These materials are required to be used for plan years beginning on or after Jan. 1, 2021. This means that the updated template must be used for the 2021 plan year’s open enrollment period.

✓ In connection with a plan’s 2021 open enrollment period, prepare to use the new SBC template and related materials. The SBC should be included with the plan’s application materials. If coverage automatically renews for current participants, the SBC must generally be provided no later than 30 days before the beginning of the new plan year.

✓ For self-funded plans, the plan administrator is responsible for providing the SBC. For insured plans, both the plan and the issuer are obligated to provide the SBC, although this obligation is satisfied for both parties if either one provides the SBC. Thus, if you have an insured plan, you should confirm that your health insurance issuer will assume responsibility for providing the SBCs.

Grandfathered Plan Notice

If you have a grandfathered plan, make sure to include information about the plan’s grandfathered status in plan materials describing the coverage under the plan, such as SPDs and open enrollment materials. Model language is available from the DOL.

Notice of Patient Protections

Under the ACA, non-grandfathered group health plans and issuers that require designation of a participating primary care provider must permit each participant, beneficiary and enrollee to designate any available participating primary care provider (including a pediatrician for children). Also, plans and issuers that provide obstetrical/gynecological care and require a designation of a participating primary care provider may not require preauthorization or referral for obstetrical/gynecological care.

If a non-grandfathered plan requires participants to designate a participating primary care provider, the plan or issuer must provide a notice of these patient protections whenever the SPD or similar description of benefits is provided to a participant. If your plan is subject to this notice requirement, you should confirm that it is included in the plan’s open enrollment materials. Model language is available from the DOL.

Other Notices

Group health plan sponsors should consider including the following enrollment and annual notices with the plan’s open enrollment materials.

Initial COBRA Notice

The Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA) applies to employers with 20 or more employees that sponsor group health plans. Group health plan administrators must provide an initial COBRA notice to new participants and certain dependents within 90 days after plan coverage begins. The initial COBRA notice may be incorporated into the plan’s SPD. A model initial COBRA notice is available from the DOL.

Notice of HIPAA Special Enrollment Rights

At or prior to the time of enrollment, a group health plan must provide each eligible employee with a notice of his or her special enrollment rights under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). This notice may be included in the plan’s SPD.

Summary Plan Description

Plan administrators must provide an SPD to new participants within 90 days after plan coverage begins. Any changes that are made to the plan should be reflected in an updated SPD booklet or described to participants through an SMM. Also, an updated SPD must be furnished every five years if changes are made to SPD information or if the plan is amended. Otherwise, a new SPD must be provided every 10 years.

HIPAA Privacy Notice

The HIPAA Privacy Rule requires covered entities (including group health plans and issuers) to provide a Notice of Privacy Practices (or Privacy Notice) to each individual who is the subject of protected health information (PHI). Health plans are required to send the Privacy Notice at certain times, including to new enrollees at the time of enrollment. Also, at least once every three years, health plans must either redistribute the Privacy Notice or notify participants that the Privacy Notice is available and explain how to obtain a copy.

Self-insured health plans are required to maintain and provide their own Privacy Notices. Special rules, however, apply for fully insured plans. Under these rules, the health insurance issuer, and not the health plan itself, is primarily responsible for the Privacy Notice.

Special Rules for Fully Insured Plans: The plan sponsor of a fully insured health plan has limited responsibilities with respect to the Privacy Notice.

  • If the sponsor of a fully insured plan has access to PHI for plan administrative functions, it is required to maintain a Privacy Notice and to provide the notice upon request.
  • If the sponsor of a fully insured plan does not have access to PHI for plan administrative functions, it is not required to maintain or provide a Privacy Notice.

A plan sponsor’s access to enrollment information, summary health information and PHI that is released pursuant to a HIPAA authorization does not qualify as having access to PHI for plan administration purposes.

Model Privacy Notices are available through HHS.

Annual CHIPRA Notice

Group health plans covering residents in a state that provides a premium subsidy to low-income children and their families to help pay for employer-sponsored coverage must send an annual notice about the available assistance to all employees residing in that state. The DOL has provided a model notice.

WHCRA Notice

Plans and issuers must provide notice of participants’ rights to mastectomy-related benefits under the Women’s Health and Cancer Rights Act (WHCRA) at the time of enrollment and on an annual basis. Model language for this disclosure is available on the DOL’s website.

Medicare Part D Notices

Group health plan sponsors must provide a notice of creditable or non-creditable prescription drug coverage to Medicare Part D-eligible individuals who are covered by, or who apply for, prescription drug coverage under the health plan. This creditable coverage notice alerts the individuals as to whether or not their prescription drug coverage is at least as good as the Medicare Part D coverage. The notice generally must be provided at various times, including when an individual enrolls in the plan and each year before Oct. 15 (when the Medicare annual open enrollment period begins). Model notices are available on the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services’ website.

Summary Annual Report

Plan administrators who are required to file a Form 5500 must provide participants with a narrative summary of the information in the Form 5500, called a summary annual report (SAR). A model notice is available from the DOL.

Group health plans that are unfunded (that is, benefits are payable from the employer’s general assets and not through an insurance policy or trust) are not subject to the SAR requirement. The plan administrator generally must provide the SAR within nine months of the close of the plan year. If an extension of time to file the Form 5500 is obtained, the plan administrator must furnish the SAR within two months after the close of the extension period.

Michelle’s Law Notice

Group health plans that condition dependent eligibility on a child’s full-time student status must provide a notice of the requirements of Michelle’s Law in any materials describing a requirement for certifying student status for plan coverage. Under Michelle’s Law, a plan cannot terminate a child’s coverage for loss of full-time student status if the change in status is due to a medically necessary leave of absence. Due to the ACA’s age 26 mandate for dependent coverage, most health plans no longer condition dependent eligibility on full-time student status and, thus, are not subject to Michelle’s Law.

HIPAA Opt-out for Self-funded, Nonfederal Governmental Plans

Sponsors of self-funded, nonfederal governmental plans may opt out of certain federal mandates, such as the mental health parity requirements and the WHCRA coverage requirements. Under an opt-out election, the plan must provide a notice to enrollees regarding the election. The notice must be provided annually and at the time of enrollment. Model language for this notice is available for sponsors to use.

Wellness Program Notices

Group health plans that include wellness programs may be required to provide certain notices regarding the program’s design. As a general rule, these notices should be provided when the wellness program is communicated to employees and before employees provide any health-related information or undergo medical examinations.

HIPAA Wellness Program Notice—HIPAA imposes a notice requirement on health-contingent wellness programs that are offered under group health plans. Health-contingent wellness plans require individuals to satisfy standards related to health factors (for example, not smoking) in order to obtain rewards. The notice must disclose the availability of a reasonable alternative standard to qualify for the reward (and, if applicable, the possibility of waiver of the otherwise applicable standard) in all plan materials describing the terms of a health-contingent wellness program. The DOL’s compliance assistance guide includes a model notice that can be used to satisfy this requirement.

ADA Wellness Program Notice—Employers with 15 or more employees are subject to the ADA. Wellness programs that include health-related questions or medical exams must comply with the ADA’s requirements, including an employee notice requirement. Employers must give participating employees a notice that tells them what information will be collected as part of the wellness program, with whom it will be shared and for what purpose, the limits on disclosure and the way information will be kept confidential. The EEOC has provided a sample notice to help employers comply with this ADA requirement.

As has been the case since 1950, the professional agents and underwriters at Morris & Reynolds Insurance are happy to help you. Whether you have a question about this topic or need help with any form of insurance, please contact us at any time at 305.238.1000.

NY Federal Court Partially Vacates FFCRA Leave Regulations

In a case brought by the New York attorney general, a New York federal district court has vacated portions of regulations issued by the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) under the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA) leave provisions. As yet, it is unknown whether the DOL will appeal the decision, whether other states will bring similar court actions or, if they do, whether courts in other jurisdictions will reach the same result. Employers are advised to stay updated on developments in these areas to ensure their FFCRA leave policies comply with the law.

The opinion struck down the following provisions in the FFCRA leave rules:

  • The requirement that an employer have work available for an employee taking leave;
  • The definition of health care providers who may be denied leave;
  • The requirement that employers consent to intermittent leave; and
  • The requirement that employees provide documentation for leave before taking leave.

The judge in the case noted that the work availability requirement could “considerably narrow the statute’s potential scope” due to the decrease in work immediately available for employees who otherwise remain formally employed, as a result of the COVID-19 emergency.

FFCRA Paid Leave

The FFCRA provides paid leave for specified coronavirus (COVID-19)-related reasons. Two types of leave are required under the act: emergency paid sick leave of up to 80 hours, and up to 12 weeks of partially compensated emergency family medical leave under an expansion to the Family and Medical Leave Act.

Work Available

The court struck the regulatory prohibition on FFCRA leave for employees whose employer does not have work available for them.

Health Care Employees

The regulatory definition of health care employees who may be excepted from FFCRA leave was ruled too broad.

As has been the case since 1950, the professional agents and underwriters at Morris & Reynolds Insurance are happy to help you. Whether you have a question about this topic or need help with any form of insurance, please contact us at any time at 305.238.1000.

Preparing for an Unprecedented Open Enrollment Period

Open enrollment following the COVID-19 pandemic will be unlike any other in recent memory. Many organizations are still trying to recover from extended closures and maintain safe working environments—open enrollment is the last thing on their minds. Yet, procrastinating on enrollment planning can actually cause more issues than it solves. This article explains what employers can expect this enrollment period and how to prepare.

Open Enrollment Trends to Watch

Expect major disruptions to open enrollment this year. From an operational standpoint, COVID-19 might surge in the fall and force states to reclose businesses. From a personnel standpoint, employees may not be comfortable returning if they feel unsafe in the workplace. These are two worst-case scenarios, but they exemplify the multitude of potential disruptors stemming from COVID-19 this enrollment period.

In fact, many organizations are expected to hold entirely virtual open enrollments due to health-related fears. Virtual enrollment has been trending for several years, and the COVID-19 pandemic is helping to solidify its prominence. A virtual enrollment process typically includes an online enrollment platform for selecting benefits, remote meetings between employees and HR, and downloadable benefits resources.

While virtual enrollment will almost certainly be the new standard, it’s not necessarily the solution for everyone. Employees’ technology skill levels, language barriers and past expectations will all influence what open enrollment looks like across different organizations. It’s up to individual employers to decide how to pair virtual enrollment solutions with other resources to meet the unique needs of their employees and the organization as a whole.

Many employers are meeting these challenges through supplemental health plans with an emphasis on overall well-being. Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, employers have been looking for ways to control costs while providing employees with meaningful mental health resources to curb burnout. Adding optional health benefits can be a way to limit additional employer spending and provide assistance to employees who need it.

Employer Next Steps

Preparation will be the key factor for a successful open enrollment this year. Employers should talk to stakeholders early and prepare to answer any employee questions. Employees will need to know exactly how they will be enrolling, when enrollment is happening and where they can find help. Solidifying this information early will help keep everyone on the same page.

Employers should consider reaching out to employees to determine what kind of enrollment process will work best for them. However, it should be clear that these suggestions must fit in with larger workplace operations. For instance, in-person meetings may not be an option.

The following page includes more examples of how employers can prepare for open enrollment.

Ways Employers Can Prepare

Open enrollment isn’t always a clear-cut process. Something that’s successful for one organization won’t necessarily work for another. Employers should review the following strategies and consider how similar initiatives might improve their own open enrollment efforts:

  • Confer with management about any operational restrictions that may influence open enrollment (i.e., if in-person staff is limited within the workplace, in-person enrollment is likely not an option).
  • Meet with stakeholders to solidify what the enrollment process will look like, including whether it will be entirely virtual, in-person with social distancing or some other combination of strategies.
  • Debrief managers early in the enrollment process, and encourage them to communicate regularly to employees about the upcoming open enrollment.
  • Inform all stakeholders (anyone to whom an employee may reach out about open enrollment questions) about the enrollment process. They should know where to find the answers to any topic, including:
    • Benefits effective date
    • Enrollment period
    • What happens to furloughed employees’ benefits
    • How plan contributions work during extended closures
  • Communicate to employees about open enrollment through multiple channels. Consider using videos, mail-home postcards, PDFs and other materials to ensure employees have all the information they need.

While many organizations are finding success with these efforts, they are not the only strategies that work. Speak with the professional agents and underwriters at Morris & Reynolds Insurance to discuss an open enrollment process that meets the unique needs of your organization. Please contact us at any time at 305.238.1000.

D.C. Court Rules for Insurer, Dismisses COVID-19 Business Income Claim

In perhaps the highest profile COVID-19 business income lawsuit to-date, Rose’s 1 versus Erie Indemnity, the court ruled in favor of the insurer and concluded that the plaintiff (Rose’s 1) had failed to prove that they had suffered any direct physical loss as their insurance policy would have required. Countless business interruption claims and a large number of lawsuits have been filled all over America since the pandemic has crippled our global economy.

As we have outlined in earlier posts, exclusions related to virus and bacteria perils date back to the SARS virus and are today common throughout the industry. That, along with the typical need to suffer some provable direct physical loss, has led to insurer declines all over the world as well as legal rulings in favor of insurers such as the one announced by the District of Columbia’s Superior Court on August 7th.

You can read more about the ruling in an article in the Insurance Journal which can be found on-line here; https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2020/08/07/578232.htm or as follows below:

The insurance industry has notched another victory in its defense of its commercial insurance policies against claims for business interruption due to the coronavirus.

In a case brought by the owner of several restaurants against its insurer over business interruption due to the coronavirus shutdown ordered by the mayor, a District of Columbia Superior Court judge has sided with the insurer, ruling that the restaurants’ insurance policy is not triggered because the shutdown did not amount to direct physical loss.

Finding that the plaintiff restaurants failed to prove there was any direct physical loss, Associate Judge Kelly Higashi on Thursday granted a summary judgment in the suit in favor of Erie Insurance Exchange.

In March, D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser issued several orders. They included a ban on indoor dining, the closing of all non-essential businesses, and an order for residents to shelter-in-place. Rose 1 had to close its restaurants as a result.

The restaurants had purchased Erie’s Ultrapack Plus Commercial Property Coverage that included coverage for “loss of income and/or rental income” sustained due to “partial or total interruption of business” resulting “directly from loss or damage” to the property insured. The policy further states that the “policy insures against direct physical loss” with the exception of several exclusions that the judge said were not material to the case.

The restaurant company, Rose’s 1, argued that the loss of use of its restaurants was a direct physical loss because the closures were the direct result of the mayor’s orders without intervening action. But the judge noted the orders “did not effect any direct changes to the properties.”

The plaintiffs further argued that the losses were physical because the coronavirus is “material” and “tangible” rather than abstract. But the judge found the plaintiffs offered no evidence that the virus was present in their inured properties and found that the mayor’s orders did not have any material or tangible effect on the insured’s properties.

Finally the judge rejected the argument that “loss” is distinct from “damage” and that “loss” should incorporate loss of use, which should require only that they be deprived of the use of their properties, not that they suffer physical damage. But Judge Higashi noted that in the phrase “direct physical losses,” direct and physical modify the word losses and thus any loss of use must be caused by a direct physical intrusion onto the properties. The mayor’s orders were not a physical intrusion, she wrote.

She also said the plaintiffs had failed to put forth any cases supporting their contention that a mayoral order constitutes direct physical loss under an insurance policy. The judge, however, cited several cases where courts have rejected coverage where there was no direct physical harm to the properties.

The case is Rose’s 1 v Erie Indemnity. The lead plaintiff, Rose’s 1 LLC, runs several upscale restaurants including Rose’s Luxury, Elaine’s One, Pineapple and Pearl’s, and Little Pearl. The owner is chef Aaron Silverman. Other plaintiffs included Buttercream Bakeshop, Karma Modern Indian, El Cucho, Bar Charley, La Vie and Beuchert’s Saloon.

The case follows a Michigan state court ruling in July that also sided with insurers.

Judge Joyce Draganchuk of Michigan’s 30th Circuit Court ruled verbally on July 1 that some tangible alteration to a property is required to trigger coverage. What’s more, a virus exclusion in the property insurance policy would have barred coverage even if the claimants had alleged the virus did cause physical damage, the judge said.

DOL Releases More Q&As on Workplace Laws and Coronavirus

On July 20, 2020, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) announced the agency’s publication of additional guidance on applying federal employment laws in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The guidance is in the form of questions and answers added to sets of Q&As the agency issued earlier in the year about the operation of the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA) in workplace situations involving COVID-19.

FLSA FAQs

The DOL’s new guidance on COVID-19 and the FLSA addresses topics such as teleworking and compensable time, maintaining employees’ exempt and non-exempt status, and hazard pay.

FMLA FAQs

In addition to substituting “COVID-19” for “influenza” in many places, the new guidance on COVID-19 and the FMLA adds questions on whether a telemedicine appointment can establish a serious medical condition under the statute (yes, if the appointment meets certain requirements), and whether the FMLA prohibits employers from requiring a COVID-19 test of employees returning from FMLA leave (no, where the testing requirement is unrelated to FMLA leave and applies to all employees). Employers should be aware that while the DOL’s Q&As on the FMLA continue to assert that there is no paid employee leave requirement under federal law, the FFCRA does require paid leave for specified COVID-19-related reasons.

FFCRA FAQs

Issues addressed by the DOL’s additional Q&As on the FFCRA include requiring employees returning from FFCRA leave to be tested for COVID-19 and the availability of FFCRA leave after a furlough.

DOL Resources

Fair Labor Standards Act Questions and Answers

Family and Medical Leave Act Questions and Answers

Families First Coronavirus Response Act Questions and Answers

As has been the case since 1950, the professional agents and underwriters at Morris & Reynolds Insurance are happy to help you. Whether you have a question about this topic or need help with any form of insurance, please contact us at any time at 305.238.1000.