In a unanimous opinion in Ferra v. Loews Hollywood Hotel, the California Supreme Court ruled on the important practical question of whether the “regular rate of compensation” for calculating meal or rest break premium...more
7/19/2021
/ CA Supreme Court ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Employment Litigation ,
Employment Policies ,
Labor Law Violations ,
Rate of Pay ,
Rest and Meal Break ,
Retroactive Application ,
State Labor Laws ,
Unpaid Overtime ,
Wage and Hour ,
Wage Orders
Currently, under the California Family Rights Act (“CFRA”), California employers with 50 or more employees must provide 12 weeks of job protection to employees to care for a seriously ill family member or for one’s own...more
On September 9, 2020, Governor Gavin Newsom signed AB 1867, which supplements both the federal Families First Coronavirus Response Act and California Executive Order N-51-20, with the result of providing some form of paid...more
Employees must be paid for time spent on their employer’s premises waiting for, and undergoing, required searches of bags and other property voluntarily brought to work, according to the California Supreme Court’s ruling...more
On September 18, 2019, Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law Assembly Bill 5, which clarifies when workers should be considered “employees” under the California Labor Code and the California Unemployment Insurance Code,...more
10/9/2019
/ ABC Test ,
Affordable Care Act ,
Dynamex ,
Employee Benefits ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Freelance Workers ,
Governor Newsom ,
Health Insurance ,
Independent Contractors ,
Misclassification ,
New Legislation ,
Payroll Taxes ,
Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) ,
Staffing Agencies ,
State Labor Laws ,
Wage and Hour ,
Withholding Tax
On September 18, 2019, Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law Assembly Bill 5, which clarifies when workers should be considered “employees” under the California Labor Code and the California Unemployment Insurance Code,...more
9/24/2019
/ ABC Test ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Dynamex ,
Employee Definition ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Governor Newsom ,
Independent Contractors ,
Labor Code ,
Misclassification ,
New Legislation ,
State Labor Laws ,
Wage and Hour
In July of 2018, Dorsey updated you on the California Supreme Court’s ruling in Troester v. Starbucks Corp., where the Court rejected the federal minimis doctrine, which exempts employers from compensating employees for short...more
In a long-awaited decision, the California Supreme Court rejected the federal de minimis doctrine, making clear that in any instance in which employees perform “minutes of work,” before or after their shifts, that time must...more
7/31/2018
/ CA Supreme Court ,
De Minimis Claims ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Employment Litigation ,
Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) ,
Federal Labor Laws ,
Federal v State Law Application ,
Labor Code ,
Labor Law Violations ,
Starbucks ,
State Labor Laws ,
Timekeeping ,
Unpaid Wages ,
Wage and Hour
Question: We have our electronic handbook and arbitration agreement online, and all employees sign both electronically. I saw a news blurb that a California court last year refused to enforce an arbitration agreement that...more
This past Tuesday, the United States Supreme Court issued a decision in Integrity Staffing Solutions, Inc. v. Busk, No. 13-433, that clarifies when a non-exempt employee begins and ends the work day – and, therefore, when an...more
Quirky Question -
We are a California employer. After all the publicity surrounding class actions over meal and break periods, we instituted automatic warnings if employees take too long or too short a meal or rest...more
We are located in California and would like to change to a piece-rate system where we pay non-exempt employees a set amount for completed tasks. I understand that this is referred to as paying for a “piece-rate” and it is...more