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
In a welcome win for employers, the California Supreme Court recently blocked a PAGA plaintiff’s attempt to intervene and object to another PAGA plaintiff’s proposed settlement as a matter of right, in Turrieta v. Lyft, Inc.,...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Supreme Court held that PAGA does not apply to public entity employers....more
On August 15, 2024, the California Supreme Court issued a momentous unanimous decision in Stone v. Alameda Health System (“Stone”), concluding that public employers are exempt from various Labor Code provisions and PAGA...more
The California Supreme Court just held that a plaintiff in one PAGA action does not have the right to intervene or object to a judgment in a similar action even if a settlement or other resolution in that similar case results...more
The “Summer of PAGA” continued last week when the California Supreme Court ruled in Turrieta v. Lyft, Inc., Case No. S271721, that a plaintiff in a Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) action does not have standing to...more
On July 1, 2024, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law a package of reforms to the Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”), a statute that has created headaches for employers and driven up wage and hour litigation...more
For years, California employers have struggled to deal with claims under the state’s Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”)(Labor Code §§ 2699, et seq.), known – without affection – in the early days as the “Sue Your Boss”...more
Aggrieved employee is any person who was employed by the alleged violator and against whom one or more of the alleged violations was committed. An “aggrieved employee” is any person who was employed by the alleged violator...more
California employers can finally breathe a sigh of relief. The long-awaited and much-needed Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) reform has arrived. While the reform falls well short of the ballot initiative efforts to...more
When is an employer’s violation of providing employees with wage statements knowing and intentional, triggering financial penalties? Taking its second look at the case, the California Supreme Court ruled that an...more
The California Supreme Court answered a trio of questions from the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals about “hours worked” under Wage Order No. 16, which governs the construction, drilling, logging and mining industries....more
In Naranjo v. Spectrum Security Services, Inc., Case No. S279397 (May 6, 2024), the California Supreme Court held that if an employer reasonably and in good faith believed it was providing a complete and accurate wage...more
In a favorable ruling for employers defending against wage statement compliance claims, the California Supreme Court in Naranjo v. Spectrum Services Inc. (Naranjo) settled an age-old dispute by determining that an employer...more
On May 6, 2024, the Supreme Court of California held that when an employer “reasonably and in good faith” believes it complied with California’s legal requirement to provide accurate wage statements and it does not, the...more
At Meyers Nave, we prioritize assisting our clients in establishing and maintaining wage and hour policies that comply with legal standards. This includes implementing effective systems and processes to ensure all levels of...more
Earlier this week, a unanimous California Supreme Court held that employers have a viable good faith defense to claims for statutory penalties arising out of wage statement violations. The Court's decision, in Naranjo v....more
The Question - The basics of California’s wage statement requirements should be familiar to employers. The consequences for failing to comply with these requirements can be severe....more
On Monday May 7, the California Supreme Court confirmed, in Naranjo v. Spectrum Securities Services, Inc., S279397.PDF (ca.gov), that penalties authorized under Labor Code Section 226 (“Section 226”) for “knowing and...more
For the second time, the California Supreme Court issued a ruling in Naranjo v. Spectrum Security Systems in May. In May 2022, the California Supreme Court issued its first decision in Naranjo v. Spectrum Security Systems,...more
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
On February 12, 2024, in Johnson v. Lowe’s Home Centers, LLC, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that an employee’s non-arbitrable, representative PAGA claims are not subject to dismissal when the plaintiff is ordered to...more
On January 18, 2024, the California Supreme Court issued a highly anticipated decision in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc., determining whether trial courts can dismiss Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claims as...more
On January 18, 2024, the California Supreme Court made a significant ruling in the case of Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc., finding that the trial court lacked the inherent authority to dismiss a California’s Private...more
The California Supreme Court has determined that trial courts lack the authority to strike claims brought under California’s Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) on the grounds that trying them would be unmanageable....more
In Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills Inc., a unanimous decision by the California Supreme Court resolves a split between California courts of appeal by ruling that a trial court does not have inherent authority to strike PAGA...more