News & Analysis as of

Labor Code Class Action Appeals

Clark Hill PLC

In win for employers, the California Court of Appeal ruled prospective meal break waivers can be permissible

Clark Hill PLC on

What is a “blanket” or “prospective” meal period waiver? California employers can offer non-exempt employees the opportunity to (1) waive their first meal period if their work period does not exceed six hours or (2) waive...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

California Court of Appeal Rules Prospective Meal Waivers Are Enforceable

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

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

Fox Rothschild LLP

California Court Rules in Favor of Prospective Meal Period Waivers for Employers

Fox Rothschild LLP on

In a significant ruling for employers, the California Court of Appeal has validated the use of “prospective” meal period waivers, allowing workers to voluntarily waive their meal breaks in advance, under certain conditions....more

Offit Kurman

Key Trends in PAGA Arbitration Decisions: Insights for Employers and Legal Counsel

Offit Kurman on

The proliferation of wage and hour litigation in California and recent significant changes to the law have created uncertainty for employers and their lawyers alike. Both recent PAGA (Private Attorneys General Act of 2004)...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

PAGA Plaintiffs Cannot Avoid Arbitration by Bringing a “Headless PAGA Lawsuit”

California’s Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) allows “aggrieved employees” to sue their employers for Labor Code violations to collect civil penalties “on behalf of himself or herself and other current or former...more

Proskauer - California Employment Law

You Can’t Spell “Aggrieved Employees” Without an “I”: PAGA Claims Cannot be Headless

In yet another attempt to avoid arbitration agreements, plaintiffs’ lawyers in the wake of the blockbuster court decisions in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana and Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. began filing so-called...more

ArentFox Schiff

Understanding Arbitration and Equitable Estoppel: Lessons From Gonzalez v. Nowhere Beverly Hills LLC

ArentFox Schiff on

Employment arbitration agreements are an important tool for employers who wish to resolve workplace disputes in a more streamline fashion and, more importantly, avoid class and collective actions. However, enforcing...more

ArentFox Schiff

Rodriguez v. Lawrence Equipment, Inc.: Employee Lacks Standing to Pursue Representative PAGA Claim After Loss in Arbitration

ArentFox Schiff on

In Rodriguez v. Lawrence Equipment, Inc., Case No. B325261 (Nov. 8, 2024), the California Court of Appeal held that an employee who loses their Labor Code claims in an individual arbitration no longer has standing to pursue a...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

California Supreme Court Confirms the “Knowing and Intentional” Standard of California’s Wage Statement Law Requires a “Knowing...

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

Foley & Lardner LLP

California Supreme Court Limits Manageability Defense to PAGA Claims

Foley & Lardner LLP on

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

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

California Supreme Court Decision Limits Manageability Dismissals for PAGA Claims

For companies doing business in California, it’s important to be aware of the January 18, 2024 California Supreme Court decision in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc.*, which examined whether trial courts can strike PAGA...more

Meyers Nave

Recent Developments Since the Viking River Cruises Decision: 5 Key Things California Employers Need To Know

Meyers Nave on

What Happens to the “Non-individual” PAGA Claims Now that Viking River Cruises Compels Arbitration of the “Individual” PAGA Claim? The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana was widely seen...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Split of Authority Emerges Regarding Whether Employers Can Dismiss PAGA Lawsuits on Manageability Grounds

On March 23, 2022, the California Court of Appeal for the Fourth District in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc., ruled that courts do not have authority to strike a claim under the Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”)...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Employers May Face an Expanded Liability Period in PAGA Suits Under the Relation Back Doctrine

On February 7, 2022 a California Court of Appeal issued its decision in Hutcheson v. The Superior Court of Alameda County (UBS Financial Services, Inc.). The case addresses the relation back doctrine in the context of a...more

Akerman LLP - HR Defense

A Look Back At 2021 For California’s Private Attorneys General Act, and What To Expect in 2022

Last year was a significant year for California’s Private Attorneys General Act (known as “PAGA”), the 18-year old wage-and-hour enforcement act that, according to one study, has generated over 20,000 lawsuits against...more

Buchalter

Court Of Appeal Provides A New Weapon For Employers Regarding PAGA Claims—Manageability

Buchalter on

The California Court of Appeal issued a landmark decision on September 9, 2021, upholding a trial court’s striking (dismissing) of a PAGA lawsuit because Plaintiff could not establish that trial of the matter would be...more

ArentFox Schiff

Class Actions Quarterly Update: Labor and Employment - September 2021

ArentFox Schiff on

Ferra v. Loews Hollywood Hotel, LLC, 2021 WL 2965438 (July 15, 2021) - On July 15, 2021, the California Supreme Court issued a long-awaited decision, Ferra v. Loews Hollywood Hotel, LLC, regarding the rate at which premium...more

Benesch

California Update: State and Federal Courts Weigh in on PAGA Meal-Break Standing, Pay Statement Contents

Benesch on

In the past few weeks, federal and state decisions in California regarding various employment-related claims in California, but particularly addressing California’s demanding pay statement requirements, provided helpful and...more

ArentFox Schiff

Class Actions Quarterly Update: Fashion and Retail Quarterly Update

ArentFox Schiff on

In this issue of the Arent Fox Class Action Quarterly Update, we will be focusing on one recent California Supreme Court decision and two court of appeal decisions impacting the fashion and retail industries. Key Retail...more

ArentFox Schiff

Class Actions Quarterly Update: Labor and Employment

ArentFox Schiff on

Garner v. Inter-State Oil Co., 52 Cal.App.5th 619, Cal. App. 3 Dist., June 26, 2020, as modified (Jul 23, 2020) - Plaintiff filed a class action alleging that his employer, Inter-State Oil Co., violated a variety of wage...more

Payne & Fears

Key California Employment Law Cases: June 2020

Payne & Fears on

Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, 140 S. Ct. 1731 (2020) - Summary:  Title VII prohibits employers from discriminating against employees on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity....more

Hogan Lovells

California Appellate Rulings Give Employers Some Good News On Break Premiums

Hogan Lovells on

The filing of class actions against California employers for meal and rest break violations remain as prevalent as ever, but the California Courts of Appeal have recently issued two rulings that may help employer-defendants....more

Ervin Cohen & Jessup LLP

California Court of Appeal Agrees Employer Does Not Have To Pay For Shoes...This Time

Krista Townley was a server at BJ’s Restaurants, Inc. As a server, Townley was required to wear black, slip-resistant close-toed shoes pursuant to company policy.  Townley purchased a pair of canvas shoes that complied with...more

Payne & Fears

Key California Employment Law Cases: August 2018

Payne & Fears on

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

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

The Dynamex Decision: The California Supreme Court Restricts Use of Independent Contractors

On Monday, April 30, 2018, the California Supreme Court issued a landmark decision in the matter of Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles. In a voluminous, 82-page decision, the California Supreme...more

33 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide