News & Analysis as of

CA Supreme Court Employer Liability Issues State Labor Laws

BakerHostetler

It’s Settled: A PAGA Plaintiff Has No Right to Intervene, Vacate or Object to Another PAGA Plaintiff’s Settlement, Affirms the...

BakerHostetler on

In a welcome win for employers, the California Supreme Court recently blocked a PAGA plaintiff’s attempt to intervene and object to another PAGA plaintiff’s proposed settlement as a matter of right, in Turrieta v. Lyft, Inc.,...more

Mintz - Employment Viewpoints

A New Chapter in California’s Ongoing PAGA is Lava Saga: PAGA Reform

Aggrieved employee is any person who was employed by the alleged violator and against whom one or more of the alleged violations was committed. An “aggrieved employee” is any person who was employed by the alleged violator...more

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

California Supreme Court Finds Good Faith Defense For Employers

When is an employer’s violation of providing employees with wage statements knowing and intentional, triggering financial penalties? Taking its second look at the case, the California Supreme Court ruled that an...more

Weintraub Tobin

California Employment News: Can Pre- and Post-Shift Activities Be Compensated

Weintraub Tobin on

Meagan Bainbridge and Lukas Clary from Weintraub Tobin's Labor and Employment Group dive into the California Supreme Court case Huerta vs. CSI Electrical Contractors. Discover the key takeaways for employers on compensable...more

Locke Lord LLP

California Supreme Court Ruling Gives Guidance on Compensable Time Under California ‎Law

Locke Lord LLP on

On March 25, 2024, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in Huerta v. CSI Electrical Contractors. This ruling provides important guidance as to what does and does not constitute sufficient employer control to make...more

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

California Supreme Court Rules on 'Hours Worked'

The California Supreme Court answered a trio of questions from the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals about “hours worked” under Wage Order No. 16, which governs the construction, drilling, logging and mining industries....more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

California Supreme Court Confirms the “Knowing and Intentional” Standard of California’s Wage Statement Law Requires a “Knowing...

In Naranjo v. Spectrum Security Services, the case’s second appearance before the California Supreme Court in two years, the Supreme Court confirmed that an employer does not incur civil penalties for failing to report unpaid...more

Littler

California Supreme Court Affirms Good-Faith Efforts May Shield Employers in Wage Statement Lawsuits

Littler on

In a favorable ruling for employers defending against wage statement compliance claims, the California Supreme Court in Naranjo v. Spectrum Services Inc. (Naranjo) settled an age-old dispute by determining that an employer...more

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,...

California Supreme Court Rules Employer Can Avoid Penalties for Good-Faith Wage Reporting Violation

On May 6, 2024, the Supreme Court of California held that when an employer “reasonably and in good faith” believes it complied with California’s legal requirement to provide accurate wage statements and it does not, the...more

Meyers Nave

Wage and Hour Policies Amid Rising PAGA Filings

Meyers Nave on

At Meyers Nave, we prioritize assisting our clients in establishing and maintaining wage and hour policies that comply with legal standards. This includes implementing effective systems and processes to ensure all levels of...more

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

CA Supreme Court Grants Employers Relief on Wage Statement Penalties Under Labor Code Section 226

On Monday May 7, the California Supreme Court confirmed, in Naranjo v. Spectrum Securities Services, Inc., S279397.PDF (ca.gov), that penalties authorized under Labor Code Section 226 (“Section 226”) for “knowing and...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Good Faith Defense Applies To Wage Statement Penalty Claims

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

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

McGuireWoods LLP

California Supreme Court: Exit Security Checks in Personal Vehicles Are Compensable

McGuireWoods LLP on

On March 25, 2024, the California Supreme Court held that workers are entitled to compensation for time spent undergoing exit security checks that included an inspection of their personal vehicle. In the same decision, the...more

Morgan Lewis

California Supreme Court Ruling Gives Guidance on Compensable Time Under California Law

Morgan Lewis on

The California Supreme Court issued its decision in Huerta v. CSI Electrical Contractors, providing further guidance to employers on when employee time spent in (1) security exit procedures, (2) traveling on employer...more

BakerHostetler

California Supreme Court Holds that Employees Must Be Paid for Time Driving Through and To Security Checkpoints

BakerHostetler on

California employers who require employees to pass through a security checkpoint or swipe a security badge before exiting their worksites but after clocking out could potentially face significant liability for violating...more

Littler

California Supreme Court Clarifies the Scope of “Hours Worked” Under California Law

Littler on

On March 25, 2024, the California Supreme Court issued a highly anticipated decision in Huerta v. CSI Electrical Contractors, Inc. The Court responded to the request from the Ninth Circuit to answer three questions about Wage...more

Payne & Fears

California Supreme Court Clarifies When Certain Pre- and Post-Shift Activities Qualify as “Hours Worked”

Payne & Fears on

An issue that has long plagued employers in California is whether time an employee spends on the employer’s premises making their way to or from their worksite is compensable. We have seen a spike in lawsuits raising this...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

California Supreme Court Attempts To Clarify Issues Of Control

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

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

Buchalter

The California Supreme Court Sends A Message That Any Employer Control Over Employees—Even If The Employees Are Not Actively...

Buchalter on

On March 25, 2024, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in Huerta v. CSI Electrical Contractors, which provides certain clarity on nuanced wage and hour issues and the scope of the term “hours worked.” In this...more

Proskauer Rose LLP

Future Not Looking Bright For California Employee Nonsolicits

Proskauer Rose LLP on

On Jan. 1, new legislation aimed at curbing the use of unenforceable noncompete agreements took effect in California. The new laws, which impose potentially harsh consequences on employers for requiring employees to sign...more

Stokes Wagner

Trial Courts May Not Dismiss PAGA Claims on Manageability Grounds

Stokes Wagner on

The California Supreme Court recently issued a long-awaited opinion resolving a split in the Court of Appeal over whether trial courts may dismiss unmanageable PAGA actions. In Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc., filed...more

Falcon Rappaport & Berkman LLP

Navigating the Challenges of California’s PAGA Law: Insights for Employers

California’s Private Attorneys’ General Act, or PAGA, just celebrated its 20th birthday despite repeated, failed attempts at its repeal. California’s Labor Code is among the strictest in the nation and California law affords...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

The California Supreme Court Pulls The Carpet Out From Underneath Employers

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

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

K&L Gates LLP

California Supreme Court Allows Unmanageable PAGA Claims to Survive Challenge

K&L Gates LLP on

On 18 January 2024, the Supreme Court of California (Court) unanimously held that trial courts lack inherent authority to dismiss with prejudice claims brought under the Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (PAGA)...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

PAGA Paraphrased – Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc.

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Supreme Court addressed the split in appellate authority and held that trial courts do not have the inherent authority to strike a PAGA claim on manageability grounds....more

285 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 12

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide