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
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit joins a growing number of federal circuits to hold the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2017 decision in Bristol-Myers Squibb v. Superior Court, that sharply limited the use of nationwide...more
The California Supreme Court just ruled that public employers are not subject to civil penalties under the state’s Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (PAGA). In a pivotal decision, the court held that public entities,...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
On July 25, 2024, CaliforniaCalifornia’s Supreme Court issued a highly anticipated ruling that allows app-based rideshare and delivery companies to classify drivers as independent contractors instead of employees, if certain...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
CDF Wage and Hour Task Force – Monthly Updates and Tips - On Thursday, the California Supreme Court issued its much-anticipated decision in the matter of Turrieta v. Lyft, Inc.....more
On July 25, 2024, the Supreme Court of California upheld a state law permitting ride-sharing apps to continue classifying their drivers as independent contractors, rather than employees. ...more
In a substantial win for app-based rideshare and delivery companies, the California Supreme Court unanimously upheld California Proposition 22 as constitutional on July 25, 2024. California Ballot Initiative Proposition 22...more
Last week, on July 25, 2024, the California Supreme Court in Castellanos v. State of California unanimously upheld Proposition 22, the 2020 ballot measure that allows gig economy businesses like Uber and Lyft to legally...more
On July 25, 2024, the California Supreme Court issued its long-awaited ruling in Castellanos et al., v. State of California and Protect App-Based Drivers and Services, et al., upholding the 2020 voter initiative known as...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
Meagan Bainbridge and Lukas Clary from Weintraub Tobin's Labor and Employment Group dive into the California Supreme Court case Huerta vs. CSI Electrical Contractors. Discover the key takeaways for employers on compensable...more
On March 25, 2024, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in Huerta v. CSI Electrical Contractors. This ruling provides important guidance as to what does and does not constitute sufficient employer control to make...more
In a significant victory for employers, the California Supreme Court recently held that if an employer reasonably and in good faith believed it was providing complete and accurate wage statements in compliance with wage...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
The California Supreme Court recently issued its opinion in Naranjo v. Spectrum Security Services Inc., resolving a split of authority in California state and federal courts whether there is a “good faith” defense to claims...more
In Naranjo v. Spectrum Security Services, the case’s second appearance before the California Supreme Court in two years, the Supreme Court confirmed that an employer does not incur civil penalties for failing to report unpaid...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
On May 7, 2024, the California Supreme Court resolved a lower court split over the meaning of a “knowing and intentional failure to comply” under California Labor Code Section 226, which dictates requirements for providing...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, California LawCalifornia’s Supreme Court, in a rare and surprising “employer friendly” decision, held that an employer can avoid penalties under California’s wage statement law, Cal. Lab. Code § 226, if it...more