SHORT ANSWER: No, so long as they are serving in the interest of the corporation and not receiving compensation for their services.
Protecting Nonprofit Directors: Understanding California's Corporation Code Section 5047.5 In the heart of California's nonprofit sector, countless individuals selflessly dedicate their time and expertise to serve as directors and officers without compensation. Recognizing the critical role these volunteers play in advancing public service and charitable endeavors, the California Legislature has enacted Section 5047.5 of the California Corporation Code. This provision serves as a shield, offering protection to these altruistic individuals by limiting their personal liability for actions taken within the scope of their duties. Encouraging Volunteerism: The preamble of Section 5047.5 emphasizes the importance of volunteers in the efficient conduct and management of public service and charitable affairs in California. The provision aims to dispel the perception that personal assets are at risk for those who generously contribute their time without financial compensation. This statutory protection encourages a broader pool of volunteers, essential for the diverse and impactful work carried out by nonprofit organizations. Scope of Protection: Section 5047.5 provides a robust defense against monetary damages for volunteer directors and officers, outlining the conditions under which such immunity applies. Directors and officers are shielded from liability for negligent acts or omissions if performed in good faith, in the best interest of the corporation, and in the exercise of policymaking judgment. Exceptions and Safeguards: While the section offers broad protection, it also includes exceptions to ensure accountability. Directors and officers remain liable for self-dealing transactions, conflicts of interest, intentional misconduct, and actions brought by the Attorney General. Additionally, liability insurance is a prerequisite for the application of this protection, emphasizing the importance of financial responsibility for nonprofits. Specific Application and Requirements: Section 5047.5 applies exclusively to nonprofit corporations that are tax-exempt under Section 501(c)(3) or 501(c)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code. Furthermore, the provision mandates that nonprofit corporations maintain liability insurance, with the required coverage determined by the organization's annual budget. Expenses vs. Compensation: The section clarifies that the payment of actual expenses incurred by directors or officers in the execution of their duties does not constitute compensation. This distinction ensures that volunteers are not discouraged by concerns about personal liability while covering legitimate expenses related to their roles. Limitations and Exclusions: It is crucial to note that Section 5047.5 does not shield volunteer directors or officers from liability if the nonprofit unlawfully restricts membership or services based on certain characteristics. Additionally, the protection does not extend to volunteer leaders who receive compensation from the corporation in any other capacity. Conclusion: California's Corporation Code Section 5047.5 stands as a testament to the state's commitment to fostering a vibrant nonprofit sector. By offering legal safeguards to volunteer directors and officers, this provision encourages civic engagement, philanthropy, and community service, ultimately contributing to the betterment of society. As nonprofits continue their valuable work, the statute serves as a beacon, attracting dedicated individuals to contribute their skills and time without fear of personal liability.
0 Comments
Did you know that undocumented immigrants make significant contributions to the U.S. tax system by paying sales, income, and property taxes? In 2021 alone, they contributed more than $81 billion in total taxes to the U.S. tax system. This is more than the GDP of Alaska, Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, Massachusetts, Maine, and Rhode Island. And although they contribute significantly they don’t get to enjoy many of the benefits that U.S. citizens and residents do, like social security for instance. This is especially notable since the social security fund is projected to be depleted by 2034. Meaning if all undocumented immigrants were deported today, that projected would come much sooner, leaving many retirees in more uncertain times.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ¿Sabía que los inmigrantes indocumentados hacen contribuciones significativas al sistema fiscal de los EE. UU. al pagar impuestos sobre las ventas, los ingresos y la propiedad? Solo en 2021, contribuyeron con más de $81 mil millones en impuestos totales al sistema fiscal de EE. UU. Esto es más que el PIB de Alaska, Wyoming, Dakota del Norte, Dakota del Sur, Vermont, Massachusetts, Maine y Rhode Island. Y aunque contribuyen significativamente, no disfrutan de muchos de los beneficios que tienen los ciudadanos y residentes de los EE. UU., como la seguridad social, por ejemplo. Esto es especialmente notable ya que se proyecta que el fondo de seguridad social se agote para 2034. Lo que significa que si todos los inmigrantes indocumentados fueran deportados hoy, eso se proyecta mucho antes, dejando a muchos jubilados en tiempos más inciertos. VISAS FAMILIARES PATROCINADAS - SOLICITUD DE HIJASTROS ADULTOS
Te acabas de casar con el amor de tu vida que también tiene una hija adulta. ¿Puede solicitar a la hija como su hijastra? Respuesta corta, sí. Pero los tiempos de espera variarán según el estado del peticionario. Supongamos que usted es residente permanente legal (LPR) y se casa con un ciudadano estadounidense (USC). Tienes una hija de 30 años en México que está casada y tiene hijos. ¿Cuál es el mejor recurso para llevarla a los Estados Unidos lo más rápido posible? ¿Quién debe peticionar a la hija en México, la madre LPR o el padrastro de USC? Analicemos esto. Miembros de la familia inmediata. Un USC siempre puede solicitar a "miembros de la familia inmediata" (IFM) sin tener que esperar a que haya una visa disponible. Un IFM cae dentro de una de tres categorías: (1) cónyuge USC; (2) hijo de USC (menor de 21 años y soltero); o (3) padre de un USC adulto (21+). Aquí, la hija mexicana de 30 años no califica como familiar inmediato porque no es una “niña” bajo la ley de inmigración; lo que significa que tiene más de 21 años y está casada. Preferencia de patrocinio familiar. Las categorías de preferencia familiar son las categorías que no se ajustan a la definición de un IFM. El Departamento de Estado ha definido cuatro categorías. Primero (F1): Hijos e hijas solteros de ciudadanos estadounidenses. Esto no significa hijos e hijas menores. Se refiere a cualquier hijo o hija mayor de 21 años PERO soltero. “Soltero” se define como (i) nunca casado, (ii) divorciado o (iii) viudo. USCIS permite 23,400 de estas visas cada año más cualquier visa no utilizada por la cuarta preferencia. Aquí, la hija mexicana no calificaría porque está casada. Sin embargo, si estuviera divorciada, podría calificar como hijastra soltera de un USC. Al momento de escribir este artículo, el período de espera para una hija soltera de México es de aproximadamente 22 años. Segundo (F2A): Cónyuges e hijos de residentes permanentes. esta categoría se refiere a los cónyuges de LPR y actualmente no hay tiempo de espera. Pero aquí, la hija mexicana no tiene calidad. Segundo (F2B): Hijos e hijas solteros de LPR. El hijo o hija tendría que ser mayor de 21 años y soltero. Aquí la hija mexicana no califica porque está casada. Pero si estuviera divorciada, calificaría. Al escribir estas líneas, el tiempo de espera para esta categoría es de aproximadamente 21 años. Tercero (F3): Hijos e hijas casados de ciudadanos estadounidenses. Esta categoría se explica por sí misma. Aquí, la hijastra mexicana calificaría para que el padrastro de la USC la solicite, pero los tiempos de espera son incluso más largos que los anteriores. Al escribir estas líneas, el tiempo de espera es de unos 25 años. Cuarto (F4): Hermanos y hermanas de ciudadanos estadounidenses adultos. Esta categoría también se explica por sí misma y los tiempos de espera son igualmente largos. Aquí, la hija no calificaría Al momento de escribir este artículo, los tiempos de espera son de aproximadamente 21 años. Ignorando cualquier otro factor, el recurso más rápido para la hija sería que su padrastro le presentara una petición, pero eso aún tomará 22 años. Alternativamente, si la hija se divorcia de su esposo, la madre LPR podría solicitarla y el tiempo de espera sería de alrededor de 21 años. FAMILY SPONSORED VISAS - PETITIONING ADULT STEP CHILDREN
A public relations (PR) crisis occurs when your business suffers a negative incident that can in-turn affect your reputation, standing, and cash flow of your business. Whether it's a string of bad reviews or a major scandal involving the CEO, there is always something you can do to mitigate the consequences to your business. Although each incident is going to require a unique approach, here is a general step-by-step approach you can take help you navigate the crisis.
STEP 1 - DESIGNATE A PR TEAM OR SPOKESPERSON. You should already have somebody that you can call to handle the crisis for you. For large businesses who can afford it, a dedicated PR team is the best option. For the smaller businesses, you should have a legal resources and a designated person who will handle the media, social media, and news outlets. Once you've identified this person, that person should be the only one answering questions. More than one spokesperson can cause confusion and more chaos. Every communication between said person and the public should be carefully considered STEP 2 - CONSIDER LEGAL LIABILITY. You need to ask your leadership or legal team whether you did everything by the book to prevent the issue. For example, if you hired a bad apple and you did not perform the appropriate background checks or if you received a complaint related to the problem and you ignored it, you may be on the hook for negligence. If you think you failed to do something you were required to do you ned to consider it in your PR strategy. STEP 3 - STRATEGIZE. Your PR team, attorney, and/or spokesperson should meet to identify three preliminary things: (i) what you we really know?; (ii) how do we stop the bleeding?; and (iii) what do we need the public to know? (i) What do we really know? It's really easy to jump to conjecture and assume things you don't know. The public is going to ask angry questions and lead you to speculate. Don't fall for this and don't rush into answering. If you can't answer with certainty keep this responses in your pocket: "I know you want to know what's happening. So do we. It's our job to work diligently to figure things out. But it is also my job to deliver accurate information, which I will as soon as I have it." Don't simply say, "no comment." Buy some time and work diligently to get all the facts and craft your response only after you feel comfortable. (ii) How do we stop the bleeding? Is the crisis over or is it ongoing. If the crisis is ongoing you need to take steps to mitigate damage to your business. Educate your staff to direct all questions to your designated spokesperson and to not spread rumors. In shot, compartmentalize the "problem" until the issue or investigation is resolved. (iii) What does the public need know? When drafting your initial public statement you should know that the public WANTS to know everything, but what do they really NEED to know is the question. To volunteer information that is not necessary to address the issue is not helpful. Generally, the public needs to know that you are aware of the issue, that you are just as concerned as they are, and that you are doing everything reasonably necessary to ensure this doesn't happen again. STEP 4 - STAY ATOP THE SITUATION. Monitor the situation for changes. If the change is material to keeping the public safe or mitigating costs to shareholders you should divulge it, but if it's not don't rush to the mic. Consider documenting everything you did to protect your business, your staff, and the general public. If you are sued later you can rely on this documentation to reduce liability. STEP 5 - REVIEW INTERNAL POLICY AND PROCEDURE. When the chaos has settled, review your policies and procedures to make sure you did everything by the book. If the incident in question is one that you have not seen before consult with your leadership or attorney to create policy that will help your business address it in the future. If you filed an I-90 to renew or replace your green card and your green card expired while you're waiting for USCIS to process your application you can request an I-551 stamp on your passport to extend the expiration of your previous green card and use that to travel abroad.
Can I use the I-797 Receipt as proof of identification for travel? No, not for international travel. If you plan to travel outside of the country you need your actual green card or an I-551 stamp in your passport plus a primary form of ID like your passport or your work permit. What is an an I-551 stamp? An I-551 is a green card. An I-551 stamp is a temporary green card extension. Where can I get an I-551 stamp? You need to make a phone appointment with USCIS at 1-800-375-5283. The days of making appointments online are gone. Unfortunately the appointment may take months, which defeats the whole purpose. RESPUESTA BREVE: Sí. Si está renovando su DACA, sí, definitivamente presente una renovación y se procesará tan pronto como se reciba. Si está presentando por primera vez, también sí, archívelo. No se procesará de inmediato, pero existe la posibilidad de que se levante la orden judicial actual y se sigan procesando las solicitudes por primera vez por orden de llegada. No querrás estar al final de la fila si esto sucede.
RESPUESTA MÁS LARGA: Probablemente sepa que el 16 de julio de 2021, el Tribunal de Distrito de los EE. UU. Para el Distrito Sur de Texas sostuvo que la política de DACA es ilegal y el Tribunal prohibió al DHS otorgar las solicitudes iniciales de DACA y cualquier permiso de trabajo adjunto. Esto significa que si ya envió una solicitud de DACA por primera vez, le tomaron las huellas digitales y estuvo a punto de recibir un aviso de aprobación, desafortunadamente no importa. Todas las solicitudes pendientes se congelan inmediatamente a partir del Julio 17, 2021. Pero si usted es un beneficiario de DACA que obtuvo DACA el 16 de julio de 2021 o antes, el Tribunal de Texas permite que el DHS continúe renovando DACA y los permisos de trabajo asociados con DACA. Si califica para DACA y no ha presentado una solicitud, debería considerar hacerlo. DHS (USCIS) continúa recibiendo solicitudes de DACA por primera vez a pesar de la orden judicial. Esto no significa que los procesarán, pero los tendrán registrados como recibidos. Si la Administración Biden apela la decisión del Tribunal y se anula la orden, USCIS continuará procesando las solicitudes en el orden en que fueron recibidas. O al menos este es el curso natural a seguir. En resumen, es posible que desee considerar presentarlo lo antes posible porque cuanto más espere, es más probable que su solicitud se procese más adelante. SHORT ANSWER: Yes. If you are renewing your DACA, yes, definitely file a renewal and it will processed as soon as it's received. If you are filing for the first time, also yes, file it. It will not be processed immediately, but there is a possibility the current injunction will be lifted and first-time applications will continue to be processed on a first-come-first-serve basis. You don't want to be at the back of the line if this happens.
LONGER ANSWER: As you are likely aware, on July 16, 2021, the U.S. District Court for the Souther District of Texas held that the DACA policy is illegal, and the Court prohibited DHS from granting initial DACA requests and any accompanying work permits. This means that if you already submitted a first-time DACA application, you had your fingerprints done, and you were on the verge of receiving an approval notice, unfortunately it doesn't matter. All pending applications are frozen immediately as of 7/17/2021. But if you are a DACA recipient who obtained DACA on or before July 16, 2021, the Texas Court is allowing DHS to continue to renew DACA and work permits associated with DACA. If you qualify for DACA and have not submitted an application, you should consider doing so. DHS (USCIS) is continuing to receive first-time DACA applications despite the injunction. This doesn't mean they will process them, but they will have them on record as received. If the Biden Administration appeals the Court's decision and the inunction is overturned, USCIS will continue processing applications in the order they were received. Or at least this is the natural course to take. In summary, you may wan to consider filing it as soon as possible because the longer you wait, the more likely your application will be processed later in time. Si está entrevistando a empleados potenciales, hay una lista de preguntas que debe tener cuidado de NO hacer durante una entrevista de trabajo o en la solicitud de empleo.
Como empleador, usted desea ser justo con todos sus posibles empleados, por lo que California aprobó la Ley de Vivienda y Empleo Justo de California (FEHA - Código de Gobierno de CA, sección 12940 et seq.), que prohíbe la discriminación contra los empleados actuales y los solicitantes en el base de:
la política detrás de FEHA es que estas características NO deberían influir en la capacidad de un candidato para realizar el trabajo en cuestión, por lo tanto, no deberían preguntarse directamente y sin ningún motivo. Pero si la característica está relacionada con la capacidad para realizar el trabajo, es mejor hacer una pregunta general sobre la capacidad para realizar el trabajo. Por ejemplo, si sospecha que la solicitante está embarazada y el trabajo requiere levantar objetos pesados de hasta 75 libras, simplemente debe preguntar si la solicitante puede levantar objetos hasta ese peso y no si está embarazada. Recuerde, la FEHA fue aprobada para prevenir la discriminación, por lo que debe asegurarse de que el solicitante o empleado no sienta que su trato hacia ellos o la decisión de no contratarlos se basó en alguna de las características anteriores. Y la mejor manera de protegerse contra la posible discriminación percibida es evitar centrarse en la característica. También tenga en cuenta que un lugar de trabajo diverso genera más productividad y ganancias. If you're interviewing potential employees there is a list of questions you should be careful NOT to ask during a job interview or in the job application, UNLESS it is somehow related to the job at hand.
As a California employer you want to be fair to all your prospective employees, and to help prevent unfairness CA passed the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA - CA Gov. Code Sec. 12940 et seq.), which prohibits discrimination against current employees and applicants on the basis of:
The policy behind FEHA is that these characteristics should NOT play a role in whether an applicant can perform the job at hand, therefore they should not be asked directly and for no reason. But if the characteristic is related to the ability to perform the job, it's better to ask a general question about the ability to perform the job. For example, if you suspect the applicant is pregnant and the job requires heavy lifting up to 75 pounds, you should simply ask whether the applicant can lift items up to that weight, and not whether the applicant is pregnant. Remember, FEHA was passed to prevent discrimination, so you need to make sure that the applicant or employee does not feel your treatment of them or decision not to hire them was based on any of the above characteristics. And the best way to protect against the potential perceived discrimination is to avoid focusing on the characteristic. Also keep in mind that a diverse workplace breeds more productivity and profit. |
*This material is intended for general information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Each case requires unique legal analysis of law and facts. For legal issues that arise, the reader should consult legal counsel.
|