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
Sixth Circuit Rejects Overly Ambitious PFAS Class Action - Hardwick v. 3M Co. (In re E.I. du Pont de Nemours), No. 22-3765, 87 F.4th 315 (6th Cir. Nov. 27, 2023) - The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit...more
The state's Supreme Court has unanimously held that employers do not owe a duty of care under tort law to prevent the spread of COVID-19 to employees' household members. Although the Court, in Kuciemba v. Victory Woodworks,...more
The Supreme Court of California recently held that the California Workers’ Compensation Act (WCA) does not bar an employee’s spouse from bringing a negligence claim against the employer where the employee contracts COVID-19...more
Welcome to “PEO Pointers,” a regular series of quick-read alerts to keep PEOs and their client companies up to speed on the latest issues affecting the industry and what they can do to ensure compliance....more
Repeatedly, people would make these and other more colorful comments whenever I would describe my case pending before the California Supreme Court: Because a construction worker swore the only place he could have contracted...more
Last week, the California Supreme Court responded to a request from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to clarify whether an employer can be sued for negligence based on an employee who contracts COVID-19 at work and later...more
Last week, the California Supreme Court unanimously ruled that employers are not liable to nonemployees who contract COVID-19 from employee household members that bring the virus home from their workplace, because “[a]n...more
The California Supreme Court handed employers a win last week by making it clear that they do not have a duty to prevent the spread of COVID-19 to employees' household members. The court didn’t go so far as to say such claims...more
In a unanimous opinion, the California Supreme Court answered two questions posed to it by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal, finding that an employer is not liable for a COVID-19 injury sustained by an employee’s household...more
What Are “Take-Home COVID” Claims? “Take-home COVID” claims are claims brought against an employer by the spouse or child of an employee who caught COVID-19 in the workplace and brought it home, infecting a spouse or child...more
Last week, the California Supreme Court agreed to decide two unique questions with far-reaching implications for employer liability: (1) may an employer be held liable to an employee’s spouse when an employee contracts...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, has certified two questions to the California Supreme Court about the liability of employers when an employee contracts COVID-19 at work and brings the virus home to a spouse. ...more
Employers and premises owners have a duty to "members of a worker's household" to exercise ordinary care to prevent take-home asbestos exposures, the California Supreme Court held on December 1, 2016. This ruling expands...more