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
CDF Wage and Hour Task Force – Monthly Updates and Tips - On Thursday, the California Supreme Court issued its much-anticipated decision in the matter of Turrieta v. Lyft, Inc.....more
Last week, on July 25, 2024, the California Supreme Court in Castellanos v. State of California unanimously upheld Proposition 22, the 2020 ballot measure that allows gig economy businesses like Uber and Lyft to legally...more
On July 25, 2024, the California Supreme Court issued its long-awaited ruling in Castellanos et al., v. State of California and Protect App-Based Drivers and Services, et al., upholding the 2020 voter initiative known as...more
For years, California employers have struggled to deal with claims under the state’s Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”)(Labor Code §§ 2699, et seq.), known – without affection – in the early days as the “Sue Your Boss”...more
California employers can finally breathe a sigh of relief. The long-awaited and much-needed Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) reform has arrived. While the reform falls well short of the ballot initiative efforts to...more
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
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
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
On January 18, 2024, the California Supreme Court made a significant ruling in the case of Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc., finding that the trial court lacked the inherent authority to dismiss a California’s Private...more
For companies doing business in California, it’s important to be aware of the January 18, 2024 California Supreme Court decision in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc.*, which examined whether trial courts can strike PAGA...more
The California Supreme Court has issued its highly anticipated decision in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc., concluding that plaintiffs who must arbitrate their “individual” PAGA claims are not deprived of standing to pursue...more
On May 10, 2023, the California Supreme Court heard oral argument in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc., a closely watched case that will decide whether a Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) plaintiff loses standing to pursue...more
Under California's Private Attorneys General Act, does an aggrieved employee — who has been compelled to arbitrate their individual claims under PAGA and the California Labor Code — maintain statutory standing to pursue PAGA...more
The California Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) allows aggrieved employees to file lawsuits to recover civil penalties for Labor Code violations on behalf of themselves, other employees, and the state of California...more
Since the passage of California Assembly Bill (AB) 5 in 2019, there have been subsequent legal challenges and revised legislation that continues to shape the status of independent contractors and related employment law issues...more
Last summer, we reported here the California Supreme Court ruling that premium payments owed under Labor Code section 226.7 for meal and rest break violations constitute “wages.” The Naranjo et al. v. Spectrum Sec. Servs.,...more
Sometimes, a wage and hour decision touches upon several noteworthy issues, either addressing them for the first time, in new contexts, or serving as a good reminder on topics. ...more
Highlights of Grande v. Eisenhower Medical Center - In Grande v. Eisenhower Medical Center, the California Supreme Court allowed an employee who sued and settled its case against a staffing agency to move forward with a...more
On May 23, 2022, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in Naranjo v. Spectrum Sec. Servs. Inc. (Naranjo), holding that meal and rest break premiums (also known as extra pay or premium pay) constitute “wages” that:...more
The California Supreme Court, on May 23, 2022, issued a seminal opinion in Naranjo v. Spectrum Security Services, Inc., which found that employees can recover penalties for failure to timely pay wages at termination and...more
On May 23 2022, the California Supreme Court reversed the Second Appellate District Court of Appeal and made clear that meal and rest period premiums (or “extra pay” or “premium pay”) constitute “wages” and must be accurately...more
California employers now face derivative liability for failing to list premium payments for meal periods or rest breaks on their wage statements, as well as for failing to pay all premiums timely upon separation. ...more
On February 7, 2022 a California Court of Appeal issued its decision in Hutcheson v. The Superior Court of Alameda County (UBS Financial Services, Inc.). The case addresses the relation back doctrine in the context of a...more
The California Supreme Court has held that the standard for assessing whistleblower retaliation claims under California Labor Code section 1102.5 is not the McDonnell Douglas test, but the more plaintiff-friendly standard...more
The Supreme Court of California provided California employers with important clarification on the standard courts will apply when analyzing an employee’s whistleblower retaliation claim arising under Labor Code Section...more