Latest Publications

Share:

California Governor Issues Statewide Lockdown

On March 19, 2020, California Governor Gavin Newsom issued an Executive Order ordering all California residents to stay at home due to the current public health crisis caused by COVID-19. This Order exempts from its scope...more

California Governor Temporarily Suspends Notice Requirements of California WARN Act

Given the current public health crisis caused by COVID-19, many California employers are facing the prospect of temporarily shutting down their businesses. The question that many employers have had, however, is whether such...more

California Supreme Court Clarifies What Constitutes “Hours Worked” Under California Law

In Amanda Frlekin v. Apple Inc., No. S243805 (Feb. 13, 2020), the California Supreme Court responded to a request by the United States Court of Appeal for the Ninth Circuit to answer the following question...more

Federal Court Rejects Assembly Bill 51

Assembly Bill 51 (“AB 51”) prohibits employers from requiring employees to execute arbitration agreements as a condition of employment. After being signed by California Governor Gavin Newson on October 10, 2019, AB 51 was set...more

2019: A Year to Forget for California Employers

From the California Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Dynamex to the passage of dozens of new employment laws, 2019 was an important year for California employers. While some of these new laws were discussed here, this...more

Goodbye 2019, Hello 2020

As 2019 comes to an end, employers should know about important new obligations that will ring in their new year. Our Labor & Employment experts offer some guidance on critical developments in Oregon, Washington, California,...more

California Codifies Dynamex – Now What?

On September 18, 2019, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed Assembly Bill (“AB”) 5, thereby codifying the California Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Lee. This represents the...more

California Supreme Court Confirms that the “Anti-SLAPP” Statute Applies to Claims of Discrimination and Retaliation

Prior to the California Supreme Court’s decision in Wilson vs. Cable News Network, Inc., California Courts of Appeal were split on whether California’s anti-SLAPP statute applied to an employee’s claims of discrimination and...more

California Legislature Moves to Codify Dynamex

With its decision last year in Dynamex, the California Supreme Court fundamentally changed the test for determining whether workers are properly classified as either employees or independent contractors. Specifically, and as...more

California Legislature Proposes Legislation Broadening Racial Discrimination Laws

On April 22, 2019, the California Senate voted unanimously to update California’s anti-discrimination laws to include within the definition of the term “race” “traits historically associated with race, including, but not...more

California Court of Appeal Significantly Broadens the Scope of Employees Entitled to Reporting Time Pay

Many classes of California workers are entitled to “reporting time pay,” which is partial compensation given to employees who go to work expecting to work a certain number of hours but are deprived of working the full time...more

California Court of Appeal Calls into Question the Validity of Employee Non-Solicitation Provisions

California Business and Professions Code section 16600 invalidates any contract restraining anyone from engaging in a lawful profession, trade, or business. While this language has been understood to prohibit non-compete...more

California Courts Slowly Interpret Dynamex

Almost six months ago, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in Dynamex, which dramatically altered the landscape pertaining to the classification of California workers as either employees or independent...more

California Supreme Court Resolves Conflict Regarding California’s Background Check Laws

In Connor v. First Student, Inc., the California Supreme Court resolved a conflict in Court of Appeal decisions relating to the constitutionality of California’s background check laws....more

California Supreme Court Determines that the Federal De Minimis Doctrine Does Not Apply to California Wage Claims

In Troester v. Starbucks Corp., the California Supreme Court determined that the federal de minimis doctrine does not apply to California wage claims. While this ruling does not completely eviscerate this legal defense for...more

California Enacts New Law Protecting as Privileged Workplace Sexual Harassment Complaints

On July 9, 2018, California Governor Jerry Brown signed Assembly Bill 2770. This bill extends privileged communication status to certain communications by employees and employers regarding alleged sexual harassment and...more

California Supreme Court Makes It More Difficult for Employers to Classify Workers as Independent Contractors

For almost 30 years, California courts have primarily used a subjective, multi-factor test in determining whether a worker was properly classified as an employee or independent contractor. In March of this year, the...more

California Supreme Court Embraces New Employee-Friendly Worker Classification Standard

In Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Lee, the California Supreme Court created a new employee-friendly test for determining whether workers are properly classified as employees or independent contractors. While providing a...more

California Supreme Court Instructs Employers How to Calculate Employee Overtime Pay Rate

In Alvarado v. Dart Container Corporation of California, the California Supreme Court determined how employers must calculate an employee’s overtime pay rate when the employee earns a bonus during a single pay period. While...more

California Proposes New Legislation Prohibiting Confidentiality Provisions in Settlement Agreements

In the face of a continuing wave of highly publicized complaints of sexual misconduct in the workplace, California state senator Connie M. Leyva introduced Senate Bill 820. If passed, this law would prohibit the inclusion of...more

California Implements Significant Changes in the Employment Application Process, Employee Training, and Protected Leaves

On October 12, 2017, California Governor Jerry Brown signed several bills regulating a wide range of employer actions, everything from the labeling of cleaning fluids to the employment application process. While compliance...more

California Responds to Increased Federal Immigration Enforcement Actions

On October 5, 2017, California Governor Jerry Brown signed AB 450. With the passage of this bill, California becomes the first state in the nation to enact a law prohibiting employers from providing voluntary assistance to...more

California Court of Appeal Puts a Small Crack in the Glass Door

An employer who unfairly and inaccurately is slammed by a former employee (or maybe even a current employee!) on a job-posting or employer-rating website will often look to its lawyer for help. Surely the law protects...more

California Supreme Court Clarifies California’s Day of Rest Statutes

In Mendoza v. Nordstrom, the California Supreme Court answered three questions from the Ninth Circuit concerning California’s “day of rest” statutes. The Court’s decision clarifies a significant ambiguity for employers...more

California Supreme Court Prohibits Employers from Implementing “On-Call” Rest Breaks

In Jennifer Augustus v. ABM Security Services, Inc., the California Supreme Court determined that employers are prohibited from implementing “on-call” rest breaks. This holding led the Supreme Court to reinstate an...more

63 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 3

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide