Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: A Discussion of Industry and Consumer Perspectives on Mass Arbitration
California Employment News: The State of Mandatory Arbitration Agreements in California Employment
Podcast: California Employment News - The State of Mandatory Arbitration Agreements in California Employment
#WorkforceWednesday: NLRB Focuses on Severance Agreements, Supreme Court Opens Overtime to HCEs, Ninth Circuit Rejects CA's Mandatory Arbitration Ban - Employment Law This Week®
#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS Rules on PAGA, Fifth Circuit Rules on COVID-19 Under WARN, Illinois Expands Bereavement Leave - Employment Law This Week®
California Employment News: US Supreme Court “Viking River” Decision Brings PAGA Relief for CA Employers
#WorkforceWednesday: EEOC COVID-19 Charges Surge, NYC’s Pay Transparency Law, SCOTUS Considers PAGA - Employment Law This Week®
#WorkforceWednesday: New Law on Arbitration of Sexual Harassment Claims, Cyber War Ramps Up, Salaried Nonexempt Status - Employment Law This Week®
Employment Law Now VI-114-Banning Arbitration of Sexual Harassment/Assault Claims
Update and Discussion on Legal and Practical Issues
DE Under 3: OFCCP Contractor Portal & Request for Comments for Functional Affirmative Action Programs (FAAPs)
Employment Law This Week®: FAA Arguably Preempts California Law, New CA Employment Laws for 2020, CA Consumer Privacy Act Amended
California courts, like most federal courts, have historically held that a party does not waive its contractual right to compel arbitration unless the party opposing arbitration has been prejudiced by the moving party’s delay...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Supreme Court reaffirmed that arbitration agreements are on equal footing with other types of contracts. Therefore, a court should apply the same principles that apply to other contracts...more
On July 15, 2024, the Supreme Court of California issued a decision that could provide courts in the state with significant discretion to refuse to enforce employment arbitration agreements even if only one term is determined...more
The Risk of Litigating Before Moving to Arbitrate - Many employers in California ask or require their employees to execute arbitration agreements. When a claim arises, the employer has a choice—proceed with litigation...more
The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals applied the California Supreme Court’s interpretation of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision on the intersection of the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claims and arbitration in...more
The California Supreme Court issued a much-anticipated Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) decision in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. in July, departing from the United States Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling in Viking River...more
On July 17, 2023, the California Supreme Court delivered its highly anticipated response to the United States Supreme Court decision in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, 142 S. Ct. 1906 (2022), clarifying the effect of...more
In a much-anticipated decision, the California Supreme Court in Adolph v. Uber Technologies unanimously held that a plaintiff, compelled to arbitrate individual claims under the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA), does not...more
On July 17, the California Supreme Court issued its opinion in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. (S274671, Cal. Jul. 2023), holding that an employee who has been compelled to arbitrate claims under the Labor Code Private...more
On July 17, 2023, the California Supreme Court decided an important state law issue raised by the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, 142 S. Ct. 1906 (2022). Viking River Cruises...more
In June 2022, the United States Supreme Court held in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana—contrary to California precedent—that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) allows PAGA claims to be split into individual and non-individual...more
In June 2022, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana that (1) the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) requires the enforcement of an arbitration agreement that waives an employee’s...more
The California Supreme Court issued its long-awaited ruling in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. on July 17, 2023, holding that an employee can pursue a non-individual representative action under the Private Attorneys General...more
We previously blogged about Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, in which the U.S. Supreme Court held that individual employee claims under California’s Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) are subject to...more
California’s Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) authorizes current and former employees to bring a representative action for civil penalties on behalf of the state against an employer for Labor Code violations committed...more
Summary - The California Supreme Court held in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. that a plaintiff compelled to arbitrate an individual California Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claim still maintains...more
Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an employer-friendly decision in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana. There, it held that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) preempts the California Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA)...more
California employers’ short-lived victory in the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana last June was substantially undone on Monday by the California Supreme Court’s decision in Adolph v. Uber...more
On July 17, 2023, the California Supreme Court ruled that where an employee has brought a California Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) action that is comprised of both individual and non-individual claims, a court order...more
The California Supreme Court in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. affirmed the key holding in the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana last year—the FAA requires PAGA plaintiffs to...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Supreme Court has held that a plaintiff whose individual PAGA claims are compelled to arbitration retains standing to pursue representative PAGA claims in court. Adolph v. Uber Technologies,...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Supreme Court held that a plaintiff whose individual PAGA claims are compelled to arbitration retains standing to pursue representative PAGA claims in court in Adolph v. Uber Technologies,...more
On July 17, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. (Cal. Sup. Ct. Case No. S274671), in which it addressed whether a plaintiff who is compelled to arbitrate their individual...more
California employees can now seek representative (non-individual) Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) penalties in court even when their individual PAGA claims are compelled to arbitration, thanks to a highly anticipated...more
Yesterday, the California Supreme Court, in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc., addressed the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, 142 S.Ct. 1906 (2022). The much-anticipated Adolph...more