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
Last week a trial court in Alameda County entered an order permitting Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. to recover nearly $125,000 in costs from the California Labor and Workforce Development Agency (LWDA). Hobby Lobby incurred these...more
A recent Ninth Circuit panel held that Hyatt employees who were “laid off” in March 2020 were entitled to payment of their accrued vacation time immediately, even though the employees were not officially terminated until June...more
The California Supreme Court (the Court) issued a unanimous decision on May 22, 2023, in the case of People ex rel. Garcia-Brower v. Kolla’s, Inc. The ruling broadened the interpretation of “disclose” under California Labor...more
The California Supreme Court has expanded whistleblower protections under state law, taking a broad reading of the term “disclosure.”...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
Until recently, employers had the luxury of interpreting the outside salesperson exemption to minimum wage, overtime and meal and rest period requirements at face value. This is because the definition of an “outside...more
In a pro-employer decision addressing the overlap of federal and California wage and hour law, the California Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District upheld summary adjudication for the employer, finding that the...more
A California Superior Court judge recently preliminarily approved a $100 million settlement in connection with a class action brought on behalf of a class of current and former female employees at video game studio Riot...more
An employee in California has two primary options to pursue a claim for the enforcement of minimum wage and overtime pay rights. The employee may seek judicial relief by filing an ordinary civil action. Alternatively, the...more
Earlier this week a hard fought victory was secured for California employers when a California Court of Appeal found that the employer did not violate the law when it selected a method of calculating the regular rate of pay...more
On November 26, 2019, San Francisco Superior Court Judge Richard B. Ulmer ruled that the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) might not apply to Uber drivers who are engaged in interstate commerce while driving passengers to or...more
On June 4, 2019, the Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District issued an unpublished opinion in Krista Townley v. BJ’s Restaurants, Inc. holding that BJ’s Restaurants was not required to reimburse its employees for the cost...more
It is well-known among employers that employees must be reimbursed for necessary expenditures and losses they incur in the discharge of their duties. (See Labor Code § 2802.) California Labor Code sections 6401 and 6403 go...more
It’s hard to keep up with all the recent changes to labor and employment law. While the law always seems to evolve at a rapid pace, there have been an unprecedented number of changes for the past few years—and this past month...more
The analysis of whether a worker is an employee or independent contractor for purposes of California’s Wage Orders became more restrictive in 2018 following the California Supreme Court’s adoption of the “ABC” test in the...more
Last year, the California Supreme Court decided Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles, a landmark decision that dramatically increased the risk of misclassifying individuals as independent...more
If you have ever received a pre-litigation records request, then you may already know that such a request tends to be a harbinger of a lawsuit on the horizon. Plaintiff’s lawyers regularly use Labor Code provisions to obtain...more
It’s a situation any Human Resources professional might find themselves in – circumstances require you to effectuate a termination in short order and you have to scramble to calculate the employees’ correct final pay and...more
In a less-than-favorable decision for employers – Alvarado v. Dart Container Corporation – the California Supreme Court addressed how to calculate the overtime pay rate when the employee earns a non-production, flat sum bonus...more
California is a difficult landscape for employers, and last month, the California Supreme Court made that landscape all the more difficult. In a case called Alvarado v. Dart Container Corp., the California Supreme Court...more
California businesses must follow a different standard than that allowed under the federal rules when calculating overtime to address flat sum bonuses. ...more
For decades, many employers across California relied upon established federal law governing the calculation of overtime compensation on bonuses. Under federal law, the same set of rules apply to flat sum bonuses (i.e., set...more
Failing to comply with last week’s California Supreme Court order concerning overtime pay and lump sum bonuses may expose you to costly class actions like so many other California employers....more
Seyfarth Synopsis: California employers must use the formula prescribed by the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement Manual to calculate overtime on flat sum bonuses, not the bonus overtime formula used under federal law....more