The California Labor Code generally requires that employers provide meal periods to non-exempt employees working more than five hours. However, the Labor Code provides that meal periods can be waived by agreement of the...more
4/24/2025
/ Appeals ,
California ,
Class Action ,
Employee Rights ,
Employment Litigation ,
Labor Code ,
Non-Exempt Employees ,
Rest and Meal Break ,
State Labor Laws ,
Wage and Hour ,
Wage Orders ,
Waivers
The California Court of Appeal held that after the employer-defendant successfully moved to compel arbitration of the plaintiffs’ employment-related claims, the employer-defendant did not waive its right to arbitration by...more
2/25/2025
/ Appeals ,
Arbitration ,
Arbitration Agreements ,
California ,
Class Action ,
Dispute Resolution ,
Employees ,
Employment Contract ,
Employment Litigation ,
Labor Law Violations ,
Motion to Compel ,
Wage and Hour
Employees who sign an arbitration agreement with one company cannot avoid arbitration with related defendant-companies by arguing they were not parties to the agreement. The California Court of Appeal held that claims against...more
12/11/2024
/ Appeals ,
Arbitration ,
Arbitration Agreements ,
Class Action ,
Contract Terms ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Employment Contract ,
Employment Litigation ,
Equitable Estoppel ,
Grocery Store Workers ,
Grocery Stores ,
Labor Law Violations ,
Motion to Compel ,
Non-Signatories ,
Wage and Hour
Seyfarth Synopsis: The federal Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021 (“EFAA”) renders arbitration agreements unenforceable with regard to claims of sexual assault and sexual harassment....more
10/15/2024
/ #MeToo ,
Arbitration ,
Arbitration Agreements ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Employment Contract ,
Employment Litigation ,
Federal Arbitration Act ,
Hiring & Firing ,
Mandatory Arbitration Clauses ,
Sexual Assault ,
Sexual Harassment ,
Wage and Hour
The California Supreme Court concluded that the “good faith” defense applies to claims seeking to impose penalties under California Labor Code section 226. An employee must show that an employer’s failure to comply with...more
5/8/2024
/ CA Supreme Court ,
Employees ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Employment Litigation ,
Good Faith ,
Labor Code ,
Putative Class Actions ,
Rest and Meal Break ,
State Labor Laws ,
Unpaid Wages ,
Wage and Hour ,
Wage Orders
On March 25, 2024, the California Supreme Court unanimously answered three questions regarding the meaning of "hours worked” that had been certified to it by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal. This ruling illuminates what...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: On January 18, 2024, in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc., the California Supreme Court addressed the split in appellate authority as to whether trial courts have inherent authority to strike a PAGA...more
On January 20, 2023, San Francisco became the first jurisdiction in the nation to require private employers to provide differential pay to employees who are called to active military. Addressing disparities between public and...more
2/6/2023
/ California ,
Employees ,
Labor Reform ,
Local Ordinance ,
Military Leave ,
Military Service Members ,
OLSE ,
Paid Leave ,
Paid Time Off (PTO) ,
San Francisco ,
USERRA ,
Wage and Hour
Seyfarth Synopsis: Under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and applicable federal regulations, percentage of earnings bonuses can be excluded from the calculation of the regular rate of pay for purposes of calculating...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: Neutral rounding policies have long been approved by the California courts. See’s Candy Shops, Inc. v. Superior Court (2012). However, the California Court of Appeal recently held that employers who “can...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Supreme Court recently determined that meal and rest period premium payments are subject to the final pay timing requirements of Labor Code section 203 and the wage statement reporting...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Supreme Court recently determined that meal and rest period premium payments are subject to the final pay timing requirements of Labor Code section 203 and the wage statement reporting...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: Two new California laws are set to significantly affect the entertainment industry: one will deal a giant blow to productions and studios accustomed to hiring independent contractors; the other will give...more
12/13/2019
/ Dynamex ,
Employee Definition ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Freelance Workers ,
Gig Economy ,
Graphic Designs ,
Hiring & Firing ,
Independent Contractors ,
Journalists ,
Labor Code ,
Labor Regulations ,
Misclassification ,
New Legislation ,
Photographs ,
State and Local Government ,
State Labor Laws ,
Wage and Hour ,
Wages
Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Supreme Court held that the Labor Management Relations Act does not preempt claims under the Labor Code where a defense requires little more than referring to a collective bargaining...more
5/1/2019
/ Appeals ,
Arbitration ,
CA Supreme Court ,
Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBA) ,
Contract Interpretation ,
Employment Litigation ,
Hiring & Firing ,
Labor Code ,
Labor-Managment Relations Act ,
Motion to Compel ,
Preemption ,
Reversal ,
Section 201 ,
Section 301 ,
Trial Court Orders ,
Unions ,
Unpaid Wages ,
Wage and Hour
Seyfarth Synopsis: The Court of Appeal, in Savea v. YRC Inc., held that an employer complies with Labor Code section 226(a)(8) when the employing entity lists its fictitious business name on a wage statement rather than the...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: An employer did not incur waiting time penalties for inadvertently misstating the amount of pay on a final paycheck, but was liable for its delay in correcting the error. And, by taking an appeal from a...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
Seyfarth Synopsis: The Court of Appeal decision that held that employers may use the federal formula for calculating overtime on a flat sum bonus is no longer citable precedent as the California Supreme Court has granted...more
Seyfarth Synopsis In A Second: A California employer can use the federal formula for calculating overtime on a flat sum bonus, even though the California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement Manual states otherwise....more
California courts generally favor forum selection clauses entered into freely by parties and where enforcement is not unreasonable. This general principle is true even if the forum selection clause is “mandatory” and requires...more