Podcast: California Employment News - The Basics of Pay Exemptions
California Employment News: The Basics of Pay Exemptions
Law Firm ILN-telligence Podcast | Episode 67: Armin Lange, Grundwerk Legal | Germany
The Labor Law Insider: Union Activity, Employment Engagement, and Changes in the Manufacturing Industry
Podcast: California Employment News - Public Healthcare Workers Now Get Meal and Rest Breaks
California Employment News: Public Healthcare Workers Now Get Meal and Rest Breaks
California Employment News: PAGA - The Four-Letter Word of Employment Law
[WEBINAR] 2019 Annual Labor & Employment Update
2019 Cannabis & Co: Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) in the Post Prop. 64 Era (Part 3)
FCPA Compliance and Ethics Report-Episode 167-Mara Senn on the Top 10 Practices in a Cross-Border Investigation
A recent unpublished California Court of Appeal decision, Hegemier v. A Better Life Recovery LLC, Cal. Ct. App., 4th Dist., No. G061892, demonstrates the potential consequence of drafting an arbitration agreement without...more
One month after the U.S. Supreme Court rejected California’s ban on enforcing agreements that require the individual arbitration of claims under the Private Attorneys General Act of 2004, the California Supreme Court granted...more
On July 17, 2023, the California Supreme Court delivered its highly anticipated response to the United States Supreme Court decision in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, 142 S. Ct. 1906 (2022), clarifying the effect of...more
In a much-anticipated decision, the California Supreme Court in Adolph v. Uber Technologies unanimously held that a plaintiff, compelled to arbitrate individual claims under the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA), does not...more
To have Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) standing, a plaintiff must be an “aggrieved employee,” which is an individual who worked for an alleged violator and personally sustained at least one Labor Code violation. ...more
On July 17, the California Supreme Court issued its opinion in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. (S274671, Cal. Jul. 2023), holding that an employee who has been compelled to arbitrate claims under the Labor Code Private...more
On July 17, 2023, the California Supreme Court decided an important state law issue raised by the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, 142 S. Ct. 1906 (2022). Viking River Cruises...more
On July 17, 2023, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. With this decision California employers need to understand that plaintiffs do not lose standing when individual...more
California employers’ short-lived victory in the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana last June was substantially undone on Monday by the California Supreme Court’s decision in Adolph v. Uber...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Supreme Court has held that a plaintiff whose individual PAGA claims are compelled to arbitration retains standing to pursue representative PAGA claims in court. Adolph v. Uber Technologies,...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Supreme Court held that a plaintiff whose individual PAGA claims are compelled to arbitration retains standing to pursue representative PAGA claims in court in Adolph v. Uber Technologies,...more
In a highly anticipated ruling, the California Supreme Court has held that employees may still have standing to sue for Labor Code violations in a representative capacity, even when their individual claims have been compelled...more
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
As we reported (here), on June 15, 2022, a near unanimous U.S. Supreme Court held that the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) preempted the California Supreme Court’s controversial decision in Iskanian v. CLS Transportation Los...more
California’s Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (“PAGA”) allows employees to act as an “agent” of the State of California and recover civil penalties for violations of the Labor Code through a civil action filed on behalf...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: In Rocha v. U-Haul Co. of Cal., the California Court of Appeal held that a plaintiff asserting a PAGA claim does not have standing to pursue a PAGA claim on behalf of others, if an arbitrator denies the...more
On February 2, 2023, the California Court of Appeal issued an important follow-up decision to the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, — U.S. —, 142 S. Ct. 1906 (2022). Galarsa v....more
Recent developments in the California Court of Appeal could impact pending or future Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) litigation. Though many employers anxiously await a decision in the pending California Supreme Court...more
Disagreeing with the United States Supreme Court’s conclusion in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, the California Court of Appeal held in Galarsa v. Dolgen California LLC that a plaintiff who has been ordered to...more
Yesterday, a three-judge Ninth Circuit panel revisited its own 2021 order and finally struck down California’s anti-mandatory employment arbitration law, Assembly Bill 51 (“AB 51”). In an opinion drafted by the former...more
Once again, California employers can require workers to sign arbitration agreements as a condition of employment. Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana and in a reversal of its...more
The Court addresses arbitration of class and collective actions in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana and Coinbase, Inv. V. Bielski.” Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, 142 S. Ct. 1906 (2022) US Supreme Court...more
In its much-anticipated decision in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, 142 S. Ct. 1906 (2022), the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) preempts California law to the extent that it precludes...more
Meda v. AutoZone Inc., No. B311398, 2022 WL 2813819 (Cal. Ct. App. July 19, 2022) - Summary: Where an employer has not expressly advised its employees that they may use a seat during their work and does not place seats at...more
Earlier this year we wrote on the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana that struck a major blow to California’s Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”). Now on the heels of the Viking River...more