California Employment News - Navigating the New PAGA Reforms: What Employers Need to Know
California Employment News - Navigating the New PAGA Reforms: What Employers Need to Know (Podcast)
California Governor’s PAGA Deal: What Employers Need to Know - Employment Law This Week®
#WorkforceWednesday: California’s Non-Compete Notice Deadline Approaches, California Workplace Violence Regulations, Estrada Decision Keeps Door Open for PAGA Challenges - Employment Law This Week®
Podcast: California Employment News - The Basics of Wage Statement Compliance (Part 1)
California Employment News: The Basics of Wage Statement Compliance (Part 1)
#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS Rules on PAGA, Fifth Circuit Rules on COVID-19 Under WARN, Illinois Expands Bereavement Leave - Employment Law This Week®
California Employment News: US Supreme Court “Viking River” Decision Brings PAGA Relief for CA Employers
California Employment News: PAGA - The Four-Letter Word of Employment Law
#WorkforceWednesday: EEOC COVID-19 Charges Surge, NYC’s Pay Transparency Law, SCOTUS Considers PAGA - Employment Law This Week®
Case in Point -- Recent Updates in California Employment Law
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
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
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
On January 18, 2024, in a highly anticipated and unanimous decision, the Supreme Court of California barred striking a claim under the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) on trial manageability grounds alone, instead...more
As we wrote previously, last summer’s blockbuster decision in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc., 14 Cal. 5th 1104 (2023) contained a notable silver lining. In ruling that a Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) plaintiff’s...more
In Arias v. Superior Court, 46 Cal. 4th 969 (2009), the California Supreme Court ruled that Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) actions need not satisfy class action requirements, and in the fourteen years since, PAGA...more
On November 8, 2023, the California Supreme Court heard oral argument in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc., a case that could have profound implications for the future of Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) litigation. ...more
Summary - Emergency Rule 9, which tolled statutes of limitations for six months due to the COVID-19 pandemic, is valid and operates to extend the time to file a civil suit for a PAGA claim as well as the time period to...more
The California Supreme Court issued a much-anticipated Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) decision in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. in July, departing from the United States Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling in Viking River...more
On May 10, 2023, the California Supreme Court heard oral argument in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc., a closely watched case that will decide whether a Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) plaintiff loses standing to pursue...more
Earlier this month, the California Court of Appeal (2d Dist.) ruled that issue preclusion bars a derivative Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claim where the plaintiff litigates individual Labor Code claims in arbitration...more
Similar to the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), California law requires an employer to pay overtime based on an employee’s “regular rate of pay.” That rate may not be just an employee’s hourly wage, or straight time,...more
On May 23, 2022, the California Supreme Court issued its opinion in Naranjo v. Spectrum Security Services, Inc., concluding that the one hour of additional compensation that is owed to an employee who does not receive a...more
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
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
On September 9, 2021, California’s Court of Appeal issued an important decision in Wesson v. Staples The Office Superstore, LLC (“Wesson”), holding that trial courts have discretion to strike claims brought under the Private...more
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
Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru, 140 S. Ct. 2049 (2020) - Summary: The ministerial exception, grounded in First Amendment’s religion clauses, barred teachers’ employment discrimination claims where teachers...more
Scalia v. Employer Solutions Staffing Group, LLC, 951 F.3d 1097 (9th Cir. 2020) - Summary: Neither the Fair Labor Standards Act nor federal common law provide an employer with a right to seek contribution or...more
ZB, N.A. v. Super Ct. of San Diego Cty., 8 Cal. 5th 175, 252 Cal. Rptr. 3d 228 (2019) - Summary: Employee may not recover unpaid wages under Labor Code section 558 through PAGA. Facts: Plaintiff Lawson worked for...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Supreme Court has held that an individual may not seek unpaid wages under Labor Code section 558. Section 558 can be invoked only by the Labor Commissioner or by an individual suing under...more
This month’s key employment law cases address meal periods and payment of wages....more
This month’s key employment law cases address the test for independent contractor status, the legality of an incentive compensation system, and personal liability for wage and hour violations....more
This month’s key California employment law cases are from the California Supreme Court and from the California Court of Appeal. Troester v. Starbucks Corp., 235 Cal. Rptr. 3d 820 (2018) - Summary: Employer that requires...more
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals recently affirmed a lower court’s dismissal of “day of rest” claims brought by two former hourly employees against retail giant Nordstrom. The court determined that the employees were not...more