Resources

Client Alerts, News Articles, Blog Posts, & Multimedia

Everything you need to know about BMD and the industry.

UPDATE: Ohio Businesses Remain Required to Post Exceptions to State-Wide Mask Mandate at All Entrances

Client Alert
August 3, 2020

On August 1, 2020, Lance D. Himes, Interim Director of the Ohio Department of Health, issued an amended order continuing the requirement that Ohio businesses post at all entrances any permitted exceptions they provide to customers, patrons, visitors, contractors, vendors and similar individuals to use facial coverings. 

The general list of permitted exceptions includes documented legal, life, health or safety considerations and limited documented security considerations.  This would include persons under 10 years old, those actively engaged in eating or drinking and actively involved in public safety.

The Interim Director’s amended order continued to mandate that businesses require employees to wear facial coverings, except for one of the following reasons:

  • Facial coverings in the work setting are prohibited by law or regulation;
  • Facial coverings are in violation of documented industry standards;
  • Facial coverings are not advisable for health reasons;
  • Facial coverings are in violation of the business’s documented safety policies;
  • Facial coverings are not required when the employee works alone in an assigned work area; or
  • There is a functional (practical) reason for an employee not to wear a facial covering in the workplace.

Businesses must provide written justification to the ODH or their local health department, upon request, explaining why an employee is not required to wear a facial covering in the workplace.

At a minimum, the Interim Director’s order states, facial coverings should be cloth/fabric and cover an individual’s nose, mouth and chin.

For additional information, please contact Adam D. Fuller, adfuller@bmdllc.com or 330.374.6737, or any member of the L+E Team at BMD.

Note: This is an update to a prior Client Alert posted on July 23, 2020: https://www.bmdllc.com/resources/blog/ohio-businesses-required-to-post-exceptions-to-state-wide-mask-mandate-at-all-entrances

mask mandatemask requirementCOVID-19coronavirusEmployement LawexceptionsState of Ohio
Client Alert

Will Student-Athlete Collectives Survive NIL Changes?

January 20, 2025By July 2025 the landscape of student-athlete funding will look nothing like the current landscape, so preparing now is a must. If you are a student-athlete, the parent of a student-athlete, a university/college, or “booster”, it behooves you to understand these evolving issues.Client Alert

Ohio's Recent Rule Changes to Administration of Immunizations, Outpatient Pharmacy Delivery, and Mobile Response Services

January 20, 2025The Ohio Board of Pharmacy (“BOP”) and Ohio Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services (“OMHAS”) recently posted notices of Ohio Administrative Code rule changes related to the administration of immunizations (BOP), outpatient pharmacy delivery services (BOP), and mobile response and stabilization services (OMHAS).Client Alert

HOA Construction Project Do’s and Don’ts

January 20, 2025Local regulators can approve new construction, but if a resident contacts their homeowners association there may be trouble. Fences, yard alterations, and backyard decks do not have to be such a hassle and a point of conflict. Find out general Do’s and Don’ts to help HOA residents avoid issues in this article by BMD Partner Scott Heasley.Client Alert

New Ohio Recovery Housing Rules Take Effect January 1, 2025

January 2, 2025Ohio’s new recovery housing rules, effective January 1, 2025, require certified community behavioral health providers to refer clients only to accredited recovery housing residences listed on the statewide registry.Client Alert

SCOTUS to Weigh In on Medicaid Beneficiaries’ Right to Choose their Provider

January 2, 2025The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments this spring on whether Medicaid beneficiaries have an enforceable right to choose their healthcare providers without state interference, as outlined in Section 1902(a)(23) of the Social Security Act. This case stems from a South Carolina petition challenging a Fourth Circuit ruling that blocked the state from terminating Planned Parenthood’s Medicaid provider agreement.
Older posts
Newer posts