California Employment News: Can Pre- and Post-Shift Activities Be Compensated (Podcast)
California Employment News: Can Pre- and Post-Shift Activities Be Compensated
This Am Law 50 senior counsel cements his authority through two appellate analytics blogs - Legally Contented Podcast
California Employment News: Premium Pay Constitutes Wages
#WorkforceWednesday: CA Whistleblower Retaliation Cases, NYC Pay Transparency Law, Biden’s Labor Agenda - Employment Law This Week®
AGG Talks: Background Screening - Redaction of Identifiers by the Courts Update, Breaking News from California
AGG Talks: Background Screening - Redaction of Identifiers by the Courts in Michigan and California Pose Challenges for Background Checks
On July 25, 2024, the California Supreme Court unanimously ruled that Uber Technologies Inc. (“Uber”) and Lyft Inc. (“Lyft”) can continue classifying their California drivers as independent contractors....more
In the 2020 general election, Californians passed Proposition 22, which gave ride-sharing and delivery app companies such as Uber, Lyft, and DoorDash the ability to continue classify their drivers as independent contractors. ...more
The DE OFCCP Week in Review (WIR) is a simple, fast and direct summary of relevant happenings in the OFCCP regulatory environment, authored by experts John C. Fox, Candee Chambers and Jennifer Polcer. In today’s edition, they...more
On May 13, 2022, the Superior Court of California in Los Angeles County held that SB 826, the law requiring companies with headquarters in California to have a prescribed number of women on their boards of directors, is...more
The road to independent contractor status for rideshare and food delivery drivers working for companies like Uber, Lyft, and Grubhub in California has been neither smooth nor inexpensive. After spending more than $200 million...more
The California Supreme Court just declined to take up the petition filed by a group of app-based rideshare and delivery drivers to hold as unconstitutional the voter-approved ballot measure that ensured that app-based...more
Just two months after 58% of Californians voted it into effect and not even one month after it became law of the state, a group of workers and a major union have filed suit to overturn the results of Proposition 22, the...more
The First District Court of Appeal held that Public Resources Code section 22531 unconstitutionally restricted judicial review of licensing decisions by the Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission regarding...more
On September 23, 2020, the California Supreme Court issued orders in each of the four cases it had accepted for review but deferred pending its resolution of Alameda County Deputy Sheriff's Association, et al. v. Alameda...more
The extraordinary measures designed to slow the spread of coronavirus (COVID-19) continue to cause constitutional clashes. My last post’s opening hypothetical about members of a congregation being ticketed for attending...more
On April 15, 2020, the California Supreme Court scheduled oral argument in the much-anticipated California Supreme Court public retirement case, Alameda County Deputy Sheriff's Association, et al. v. Alameda County Employees'...more
On Monday, Uber, Postmates and two of their drivers filed a lawsuit in federal court in the Central District of California, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief and a determination that AB-5 is unconstitutional. AB-5 is...more
The Alameda Superior Court recently declared portions of the Warren-Alquist Act unconstitutional in Communities for a Better Environment v. Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission (CBE v. Energy Commission)....more
It’s hard to keep up with all the recent changes to labor and employment law. While the law always seems to evolve at a rapid pace, there have been an unprecedented number of changes for the past few years—and this past month...more
This month’s key employment law cases address pre-employment physicals, appeals from California Labor Commissioner awards, and background checks. EEOC v. BNSF Ry. Co., 902 F.3d 916 (9th Cir. 2018)...more
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
The U.S. Supreme Court on Oct. 30, 2017, denied a petition for certiorari filed by the developers of an 11-unit residential condominium project in the City of West Hollywood seeking to challenge the application by the City of...more
On December 30, 2016, Division Three of the First District Court of Appeal (“DCA”) issued a unanimous published decision in Cal FIRE Local 2881, et al. v. CalPERS, et al. (Dec. 30, 2016, A142793) (“CalFIRE Decision”)...more
On Aug. 17, 2016, Division Two of the First District Court of Appeal issued a unanimous published decision in MAPE et al. v. MarinCERA, et al. (Aug.17, 2016, A139610) upholding the constitutionality of certain aspects of the...more
One issue that can arise in eminent domain actions involving undeveloped (or under developed) property is whether the property being acquired is potentially subject to a dedication requirement. If the property’s overall...more
Every year or so, a new appellate court decision comes out addressing the proper role of the judge versus the jury on some certain eminent domain issue. Most recently, a trial court, appellate court and the California Supreme...more