California Employment News: Can Pre- and Post-Shift Activities Be Compensated (Podcast)
California Employment News: Can Pre- and Post-Shift Activities Be Compensated
This Am Law 50 senior counsel cements his authority through two appellate analytics blogs - Legally Contented Podcast
California Employment News: Premium Pay Constitutes Wages
#WorkforceWednesday: CA Whistleblower Retaliation Cases, NYC Pay Transparency Law, Biden’s Labor Agenda - Employment Law This Week®
AGG Talks: Background Screening - Redaction of Identifiers by the Courts Update, Breaking News from California
AGG Talks: Background Screening - Redaction of Identifiers by the Courts in Michigan and California Pose Challenges for Background Checks
Ten is the presumptive upper limit on the number of depositions that each party may take in civil litigation in the federal courts. This number, provided by Rule 30(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, can be...more
In August 2000, the California Supreme Court handed down a landmark ruling that changed the face of employment arbitration agreements going forward. That case, known as Armendariz v. Foundation Health Psychcare Services,...more
Many California employers require their employees to sign agreements to submit any disputes arising out their employment to binding arbitration. If an employee files a lawsuit in court, the employer then has the option of...more
On July 15, 2024, the Supreme Court of California issued a decision that could provide courts in the state with significant discretion to refuse to enforce employment arbitration agreements even if only one term is determined...more
The Risk of Litigating Before Moving to Arbitrate - Many employers in California ask or require their employees to execute arbitration agreements. When a claim arises, the employer has a choice—proceed with litigation...more
In a recent decision, the California Supreme Court held that courts cannot refuse to enforce arbitration agreements simply by finding that three or more provisions are unconscionable. Rather, courts must use a three-prong...more
Join us on September 26 for a comprehensive webinar hosted by CDF as we delve into the crucial subject of arbitrating PAGA claims, exploring its implications following the California Supreme Court's landmark decision in...more
The California Supreme Court recently rejected the U.S. Supreme Court’s interpretation of standing under the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA). In Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc., 532 P.3d 682 (Cal. 2023), the Court...more
On July 17, the California Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc., finally clarifying the question of what constitutes standing under California's Private Attorneys General Act...more
Following the United States Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in Moriana v. Viking River Cruises, California courts were tasked with the open question of whether an “aggrieved” employee whose individual Private Attorneys...more
Last year, we discussed the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana (“Viking River”), 596 U.S. [142 S.Ct. 1906] (2022), holding that an arbitration agreement between a...more
Recently, in Adolph v. Uber Tech., Inc., the California Supreme Court held that plaintiffs who proceed to arbitration on individual labor code claims do not lose standing to bring representative claims in court under the...more
In June 2022, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana that (1) the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) requires the enforcement of an arbitration agreement that waives an employee’s...more
The California Supreme Court issued its long-awaited ruling in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. on July 17, 2023, holding that an employee can pursue a non-individual representative action under the Private Attorneys General...more
On July 17, 2023, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. With this decision California employers need to understand that plaintiffs do not lose standing when individual...more
California’s Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) authorizes current and former employees to bring a representative action for civil penalties on behalf of the state against an employer for Labor Code violations committed...more
Summary - The California Supreme Court held in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. that a plaintiff compelled to arbitrate an individual California Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claim still maintains...more
Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an employer-friendly decision in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana. There, it held that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) preempts the California Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA)...more
On July 17, 2023, the California Supreme Court ruled that where an employee has brought a California Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) action that is comprised of both individual and non-individual claims, a court order...more
On July 17, 2023, the California Supreme Court issued its long-anticipated decision in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. and held that an employee who has been compelled to arbitrate “individual” claims under the California...more
The California Supreme Court in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. affirmed the key holding in the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana last year—the FAA requires PAGA plaintiffs to...more
In a highly anticipated ruling, the California Supreme Court has held that employees may still have standing to sue for Labor Code violations in a representative capacity, even when their individual claims have been compelled...more
On July 17, 2023, the California Supreme Court unanimously held in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. that even if a plaintiff who brings a claim under California’s Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) has their individual...more
With its decision in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. (“Adolph”) the California Supreme Court has reignited the debate surrounding arbitration agreements containing waivers of an employee’s right to bring a representative...more