#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS Rules on PAGA, Fifth Circuit Rules on COVID-19 Under WARN, Illinois Expands Bereavement Leave - Employment Law This Week®
#WorkforceWednesday: EEOC COVID-19 Charges Surge, NYC’s Pay Transparency Law, SCOTUS Considers PAGA - Employment Law This Week®
Employment Law Now VI-114-Banning Arbitration of Sexual Harassment/Assault Claims
#WorkforceWednesday: Employee Travel and the Coronavirus, NLRB’s Joint-Employment Rule, and DoorDash’s 5,000+ Individual Arbitrations - Employment Law This Week®
III-41- Things That Make You Go “Hmmm” in Employment Law
Employment Law This Week®: Arbitration Agreement Enforcement, Maryland’s #MeToo Legislation, California’s National Origin Regulations
II-33- Hot Summer Trends: The Supreme Court on Class Action Waivers, and the Rise of Web Site Accessibility Lawsuits
II-27 - Our 1st Anniversary Special: Bringing Back Our Inaugural Guest to Discuss What Was and What Will Still Be With President Trump
II-25 – Top 10 New Year’s Resolutions for Employers in 2018
Employment Law This Week®: DOJ’s New Stance on Title VII, ACA Contraception Mandate, SCOTUS Hears Class-Action Waiver Arguments, RI’s Paid Sick Leave Policy
I-16 – Kneeling, Indefinite Leave, DC Updates, Non-Compete Consideration, and Pretty as a Protected Class
Employment Law This Week®: Class Action Waiver Cases, Rescission of Tip-Pooling Restrictions, Title VII & Sexual Orientation, Updated Form I-9
Employment Law This Week®: Federal Decision on Website Accessibility, Mandatory Class Action Waivers, Sexual Harassment Case Dismissed, Upcoming Employment Laws
Employment Law This Week: Class Action Waiver Split, Discriminatory Practices Suit, EEOC’s Claims Data, Highly Skilled Worker Rule
Employment Law This Week®: Retaliation Guidance, Class Action Waivers, “Persuader Rule” Injunction, “Cat’s Paw” Doctrine
Employment Law This Week: Constructive Discharge Claims, Class Waivers, Hiring Bias, Electronic Record-Keeping Rule, Equal Pay
Employment Law Issues for Health Care Employers
Evenskaas v. California Transit Inc. reversed a Los Angeles Superior Court judge’s denial of an employer’s motion to compel arbitration of a former employee’s wage and hour class action. The trial court had concluded that the...more
Case Overview - On June 15, 2022, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, No. 20-1573. The Court held that the rule from Iskanian v. CLS Transportation Los Angeles,...more
On June 15, 2022, in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, Case No. 20-1573,_ U.S. _ (2022), by an 8-1 majority, the U.S. States Supreme Court held that the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) preempts the California Supreme...more
This week, we look at two significant court decisions for employers and bring you a practical update on new bereavement leave rules in Illinois. SCOTUS: FAA Preempts California’s PAGA Loophole Last week, the U.S. Supreme...more
The United States Supreme Court’s decision in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana will dramatically impact employers’ rights to enforce arbitration agreements related to claims under California’s Private Attorneys General Act...more
Yesterday, the United States Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, Case No. 20-1573, regarding California’s ban on Private Attorney General Act (PAGA) representative waivers...more
On June 15, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its highly anticipated opinion in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, which considered whether or not claims brought under the California Private Attorneys General Act...more
Employers can enforce arbitration agreements in California to the extent they require an employee to arbitrate individual claims under the state’s Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA), according to an 8 to 1 SCOTUS ruling...more
Generally, the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) has routinely been enforced by the balance of the nation’s courts over the years, as it codifies accepted deference to parties’ contracts and agreements and has been held to...more
Takeaway: One would think that “public injunctive relief” – especially under California law – would be a broad remedy. Not so, according to the majority opinion in Hodges v. Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, --- F.4th...more
As employers and employees alike continue to monitor and watch the landscape of alternative dispute resolution as a viable option (or not) in New Jersey, an important federal court decision was recently handed down. ...more
A controversial California law that would have prevented employers from requiring arbitration agreements as a condition of employment has been enjoined from taking effect by a federal district judge. Assembly Bill 51 (AB 51)...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: Among other things, AB 51 makes it unlawful for employers to impose arbitration agreements on employees as a condition of employment, even if employees are permitted to opt out. AB 51 was quickly challenged...more
On February 7, 2020, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California issued an order supporting its injunction of Assembly Bill 51 (AB 51), an expansive anti-arbitration law enacted in October, which was...more
The California Legislature’s attempt to circumvent both the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) and the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Epic Systems by crafting a new law prohibiting California employers from requiring...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: After granting a temporary restraining order days before AB 51 was to go into effect, the Eastern District of California granted a motion for a preliminary injunction on January 31, 2020. An order detailing...more
After denying the defendants’ petitions for panel and en banc rehearing in the Blair v. Rent-a-Center appeals, the Ninth Circuit has granted their motions to stay the issuance of the Court’s mandates for 90 days pending the...more
On January 17, 2020, the Ninth Circuit denied the defendants’ petitions for panel and en banc rehearing in the Blair v. Rent a Center appeals, setting the stage for possible U.S. Supreme Court review of the California Supreme...more
On December 30, 2019, a federal judge in the Eastern District of California entered an order temporarily halting the enforcement of AB 51, California’s new anti-mandatory arbitration law. AB 51, which was set to go into...more
As employers with operations in California had feared, Governor Gavin Newsom has signed AB 51, which effectively outlaws mandatory arbitration agreements with employees – a new version of a bill that prior Governor Jerry...more
Seyfarth Synopsis. On Thursday, September 5, 2019, the Legislature passed AB 51. This bill would ban mandatory arbitration agreements with respect to claims under the Labor Code and the Fair Employment and Housing Act while...more
The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion, 563 U.S. 333 (2011) caused a shockwave in California’s class action bar when it held that the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) preempted California’s former...more
Having lost the battle to prohibit class action waivers in consumer arbitration agreements, consumer advocates have embarked on a new crusade....more
In May, the U.S. Supreme Court held that mandatory arbitration agreements containing class action or collective action waivers must be enforced as written....more