#WorkforceWednesday®: Staples Sued Over MA’s Lie Detector Notice, NJ’s Gender-Neutral Dress Code, 2024 Voting Leave Policies - Employment Law This Week®
(Podcast) California Employment News: Court Ruling Halts FTC’s Non-Compete Ban – Implications for Employers
Back to School: 3 Essential Employee Trainings
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast - Episode 30: Plaintiff Legal Trends with Paul Porter of Cromer, Babb & Porter
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast - Episode 29: Weed in the Workplace with Christy Rogers of Maynard Nexsen
The Chartwell Chronicles: Employment Law Updates
#WorkforceWednesday® - State Legal Trends: Crucial Changes for Employers - Employment Law This Week®
JONES DAY PRESENTS®: Employer Options in a Non-Noncompete World
California Employment News: Understanding the Basics of Employee Personnel Files (Featured Podcast)
California Employment News: Understanding the Basics of Employee Personnel Files (Featured)
California Employment News - Navigating the New PAGA Reforms: What Employers Need to Know
California Employment News - Navigating the New PAGA Reforms: What Employers Need to Know (Podcast)
California Governor’s PAGA Deal: What Employers Need to Know - Employment Law This Week®
The Chartwell Chronicles: New Jersey Caselaw Updates
Righting a Wrong: Putting an End to a Discriminatory Hair Test
California Employment News: Can Pre- and Post-Shift Activities Be Compensated
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast - Episode 21: Economic, Industry, and Workforce Development in the City of Greenville with Mayor Knox White
California Employment News: Brief Overview of Leave Laws All California Employers Should Be Aware Of (Podcast)
California Employment News: Brief Overview of Leave Laws All California Employers Should Be Aware Of
Non-Disparagement Settlements in New Jersey, DOL's AI Guidelines, OSHA Regions Shift - Employment Law This Week®
The California Supreme Court recently upheld a California law that classifies drivers for app-based transportation companies, such as Uber, Lyft, or DoorDash, as independent contractors and not employees, provided the company...more
I. SYNOPSIS- Ed was a vibrant and healthy 85-year-old. One day, he decided to sign an advance healthcare directive providing that if his physical condition ever declined, he wished to remain in his home as long as...more
At the end of 2020, it seemed the legislature, the courts, and even California voters wanted to move away from the independent contractor test codified in Assembly Bill 5 (AB 5). However, during 2021, the pendulum seems to...more
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has issued a long-awaited decision on the question of whether AB5, California’s strict independent contractor misclassification statute, may be applied to motor carriers, or whether the...more
Independent contractors, meal periods, and PAGA. The first quarter of 2021 yielded some key rulings from the California appellate courts on independent contractor classification, meal-period rounding, and arbitration of...more
Trial Court Properly Dismissed Employee’s CFRA And Disability Discrimination Claims - Choochagi v. Barracuda Networks, Inc., 60 Cal. App. 5th 444 (2021) - George Choochagi worked as a technical support manager for...more
Last November, California voters convincingly (almost 60% supporting) enacted Proposition 22. This Proposition was a well-funded effort that allows gig drivers working for companies like Uber, Lyft and Doordash to avoid the...more
The California Supreme Court has followed up on its groundbreaking decision in Dynamex Operations West Inc. v. Superior Court, 4 Cal.5th 903 (2018), which imposed the so-called “ABC Test” for determining whether a worker is...more
On 14 January 2020, the California Supreme Court held that its earlier landmark decision setting forth the definitive rule for independent contractor classification, Dynamex Ops. W. Inc. v. Superior Court, 416 P.3d 1 (2018),...more
Looking back, the California Supreme Court doubles down on its decision to retroactively impose the state’s ABC test for workers. Our Labor & Employment Group delves into what the future holds for employers, employees, and...more
The California Supreme Court held on January 14, 2021, that its landmark Dynamex decision, which established a rigid standard under California law for companies to classify workers as independent contractors, and later was...more
On January 14, 2021, the California Supreme Court decided Vazquez v. Jan-Pro Franchising International, Inc. The decision holds that the ABC test used to determine independent contractor versus employee status for purposes of...more
On January 14, 2021, the California Supreme Court held that the “ABC Test” for classifying workers as independent contractors applies retroactively. The high court first articulated this standard, which makes it tougher for...more
It was quite a week for the gig economy in California. This is the second of a two-part update; last week we reported on a union- and driver-led California Supreme Court challenge to Proposition 22, the November 2020 voter...more
On January 14, 2021, the California Supreme Court decided, at the request of the Ninth Circuit, that its decision in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court, 4 Cal.5th 903 (2018) applies retroactively. See our...more
On January 14, 2021, the California Supreme Court held in Vazquez v. Jan-Pro Franchising Int'l, Inc. that the ABC test for determining worker classification fashioned in its groundbreaking decision, Dynamex v. Superior...more
The California Supreme Court in Vazquez v. Jan-Pro Franchising International, Inc. ruled on Jan. 14, 2021, that its decision in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court 4 Cal. 5th 903 (2018) (Dynamex), applies...more
On January 14, 2021, the California Supreme Court in Vasquez v. Jan-Pro Franchise International, Inc. held that the three-part “ABC” test previously set forth in Dynamex Operations West Inc. v. Superior Court also applies...more
On January 14, 2021, the California Supreme Court decided, at the request of the Ninth Circuit, that its decision in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court, 4 Cal.5th 903 (2018) applies retroactively. Vazquez v....more
On Thursday, the California Supreme Court ruled that California’s “ABC” test for determining independent contractor status applies retroactively. As a result, employers may be held to a standard not even in effect at the time...more
Today, in responding to a certified question from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, the California Supreme Court held in Vazquez v. Jan-Pro Franchise International, Inc., S258191 (2020) that the...more
Since April 2018, when the California Supreme Court issued its Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court, 4 Cal. 5th 903 (2018) decision, which radically changed the way in which courts differentiated between an...more
Employers have continued to feel the impact of the 2018 California Supreme Court decision in Dynamex Operations West Inc. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County, 4 Cal.5th 903 (2018). Today, the California Supreme Court in...more
By now, you should all know about California’s Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court decision, which was the impetus for changing the state’s worker classification law. If you need a refresher on Dynamex and the ABC...more
On Wednesday, January 15, 2020, the California Supreme Court agreed to review a second case raising questions as to the scope and retroactivity of its landmark 2018 Dynamex decision....more