The California Labor Code generally requires that employers provide meal periods to non-exempt employees working more than five hours. However, the Labor Code provides that meal periods can be waived by agreement of the...more
4/24/2025
/ Appeals ,
California ,
Class Action ,
Employee Rights ,
Employment Litigation ,
Labor Code ,
Non-Exempt Employees ,
Rest and Meal Break ,
State Labor Laws ,
Wage and Hour ,
Wage Orders ,
Waivers
The California Court of Appeal held that after the employer-defendant successfully moved to compel arbitration of the plaintiffs’ employment-related claims, the employer-defendant did not waive its right to arbitration by...more
2/25/2025
/ Appeals ,
Arbitration ,
Arbitration Agreements ,
California ,
Class Action ,
Dispute Resolution ,
Employees ,
Employment Contract ,
Employment Litigation ,
Labor Law Violations ,
Motion to Compel ,
Wage and Hour
Employees who sign an arbitration agreement with one company cannot avoid arbitration with related defendant-companies by arguing they were not parties to the agreement. The California Court of Appeal held that claims against...more
12/11/2024
/ Appeals ,
Arbitration ,
Arbitration Agreements ,
Class Action ,
Contract Terms ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Employment Contract ,
Employment Litigation ,
Equitable Estoppel ,
Grocery Store Workers ,
Grocery Stores ,
Labor Law Violations ,
Motion to Compel ,
Non-Signatories ,
Wage and Hour
Seyfarth Synopsis: The federal Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021 (“EFAA”) renders arbitration agreements unenforceable with regard to claims of sexual assault and sexual harassment....more
10/15/2024
/ #MeToo ,
Arbitration ,
Arbitration Agreements ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Employment Contract ,
Employment Litigation ,
Federal Arbitration Act ,
Hiring & Firing ,
Mandatory Arbitration Clauses ,
Sexual Assault ,
Sexual Harassment ,
Wage and Hour
Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Supreme Court ruled that an isolated, one-time, use of a racial slur may be so severe—when viewed in relation to the totality of the circumstances—as to alter the conditions of employment,...more
Seyfarth Synopsis:
The California Supreme Court reaffirmed that arbitration agreements are on equal footing with other types of contracts. Therefore, a court should apply the same principles that apply to other contracts...more
The California Supreme Court concluded that the “good faith” defense applies to claims seeking to impose penalties under California Labor Code section 226. An employee must show that an employer’s failure to comply with...more
5/8/2024
/ CA Supreme Court ,
Employees ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Employment Litigation ,
Good Faith ,
Labor Code ,
Putative Class Actions ,
Rest and Meal Break ,
State Labor Laws ,
Unpaid Wages ,
Wage and Hour ,
Wage Orders
On April 12, 2024, the United States Supreme Court ruled that an individual does not need to work directly in the transportation industry to be within the scope of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) exemption for...more
On March 25, 2024, the California Supreme Court unanimously answered three questions regarding the meaning of "hours worked” that had been certified to it by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal. This ruling illuminates what...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: On January 18, 2024, in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc., the California Supreme Court addressed the split in appellate authority as to whether trial courts have inherent authority to strike a PAGA...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed a district court’s decision that “but-for” is the proper causation standard for FMLA retaliation claims addressed within the...more
1/11/2024
/ Adverse Employment Action ,
Burden-Shifting ,
But For Causation ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Employment Litigation ,
Employment Policies ,
Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) ,
Hiring & Firing ,
Retaliation ,
Termination ,
Wrongful Termination
Seyfarth Synopsis: The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a summary judgment award on an employee’s failure-to-accommodate claim. The Court’s decision focused on the employer’s improperly narrow delineation of the...more
12/19/2023
/ Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) ,
Best Practices ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Disability Discrimination ,
Employees ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Employment Litigation ,
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) ,
Essential Functions ,
Failure to Accommodate ,
Hiring & Firing ,
Interactive Process ,
Rehabilitation Act ,
Workplace Hazards ,
Wrongful Termination
Seyfarth Synopsis: In a case of first impression, the California Supreme Court decided FEHA claims can be litigated directly against certain agents of an employer. Raines v. U.S. Healthworks Medical Group....more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Supreme Court unanimously held that while claims brought by an employee’s spouse for COVID injury are not barred by the Workers’ Compensation Act’s (WCA) exclusivity provision, policy...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: A Ninth Circuit opinion has held that music with sexually derogatory and violent content might give rise to a claim for discrimination based on sex even if the music offends both men and women. Sharp, et al...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: California Labor Code section 1102.5 protects employees who disclose what they believe to be violations of the law. The Supreme Court of California has ruled that such disclosures are protected even if the...more
5/31/2023
/ Adverse Employment Action ,
Anti-Retaliation Provisions ,
California ,
DLSE ,
Employment Litigation ,
Hiring & Firing ,
Labor Code ,
Labor Law Violations ,
Labor Standards Enforcement ,
State Labor Laws ,
Unpaid Wages ,
Whistleblower Protection Policies ,
Whistleblowers
Seyfarth Synopsis: In a published decision, a California Court of Appeal has ruled that a hospital’s decision to terminate an employee for failing to comply with its flu vaccine mandate did not violate California’s Fair...more
5/23/2023
/ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) ,
Coronavirus/COVID-19 ,
Disability Discrimination ,
Employee Rights ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Employment Litigation ,
FEHA ,
Healthcare Workers ,
Hiring & Firing ,
New Guidance ,
State Labor Laws ,
Vaccinations
Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Court of Appeal held that separate arbitration and confidentiality agreements that were executed simultaneously during initial hiring should be read together, such that the unconscionability...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: A California Court of Appeal ruled that both the Fair Employment and Housing ACT (FEHA) and California’s Pregnancy Disability Leave law (PDL) require a plaintiff to prove that the plaintiff had a condition...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: A divided Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals panel has ruled that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) preempts California Assembly Bill 51 (AB 51), which purports to prohibit employers from requiring job...more
On January 20, 2023, San Francisco became the first jurisdiction in the nation to require private employers to provide differential pay to employees who are called to active military. Addressing disparities between public and...more
2/6/2023
/ California ,
Employees ,
Labor Reform ,
Local Ordinance ,
Military Leave ,
Military Service Members ,
OLSE ,
Paid Leave ,
Paid Time Off (PTO) ,
San Francisco ,
USERRA ,
Wage and Hour
Seyfarth Synopsis: Under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and applicable federal regulations, percentage of earnings bonuses can be excluded from the calculation of the regular rate of pay for purposes of calculating...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: Neutral rounding policies have long been approved by the California courts. See’s Candy Shops, Inc. v. Superior Court (2012). However, the California Court of Appeal recently held that employers who “can...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Supreme Court recently determined that meal and rest period premium payments are subject to the final pay timing requirements of Labor Code section 203 and the wage statement reporting...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Supreme Court recently determined that meal and rest period premium payments are subject to the final pay timing requirements of Labor Code section 203 and the wage statement reporting...more