Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast - Episode 30: Plaintiff Legal Trends with Paul Porter of Cromer, Babb & Porter
What's the Tea in L&E? Mouse Jigglers: WFH Fraud
The Chartwell Chronicles: Employment Law Updates
#WorkforceWednesday® - State Legal Trends: Crucial Changes for Employers - Employment Law This Week®
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast - Episode 27: The Importance of Employment Counsel in Corporate Transactions with Laura Mallory and Ashley Parr of Maynard Nexsen
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)
Employment Law Now VIII-145 – Status Update: Injunctions for FTC Non-Compete Ban and DOL Overtime Exemption Regs
California Governor’s PAGA Deal: What Employers Need to Know - Employment Law This Week®
Hospice Labor and Employment Trends - Get Up to Speed Fast: What You Need to Know About the New Rules Involving Non-Competes and Exempt Employees
The Burr Broadcast: FLSA Overtime Exemption
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast - Episode 22: Compensation Programs with Carrie Cavanaugh of Find Great People
California Employment News: Can Pre- and Post-Shift Activities Be Compensated
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast - Episode 21: Economic, Industry, and Workforce Development in the City of Greenville with Mayor Knox White
Clocking in with PilieroMazza: Labor and Employment News for Government Contractors
EEO-1 Filing After June 4: What to Do Now, and How to Prepare for Next Year - Employment Law This Week®
California Employment News: Brief Overview of Leave Laws All California Employers Should Be Aware Of (Podcast)
California Employment News: Brief Overview of Leave Laws All California Employers Should Be Aware Of
Unique Challenges and Benefits of Family-Run Businesses, Inspired by Modern Family — Hiring to Firing Podcast
AGG Talks: Cross-Border Business Podcast - Episode 13: Tips and Tricks for Foreign Investors Employing U.S. Personnel
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
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
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
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
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 6, 2024, the California Supreme Court, in Naranjo v. Spectrum Security Services, Inc., clarified that an employer is not liable for statutory penalties for inaccurate wage statements when it had a good faith and...more
At Meyers Nave, we prioritize assisting our clients in establishing and maintaining wage and hour policies that comply with legal standards. This includes implementing effective systems and processes to ensure all levels of...more
Earlier this week, a unanimous California Supreme Court held that employers have a viable good faith defense to claims for statutory penalties arising out of wage statement violations. The Court's decision, in Naranjo v....more
The Question - The basics of California’s wage statement requirements should be familiar to employers. The consequences for failing to comply with these requirements can be severe....more
This week, the California Supreme Court filed a decision in Naranjo v. Spectrum Security Services, Inc., S279397, holding that “an employer’s objectively reasonable, good faith belief that it has provided employees with...more
In a rare victory for employers, the California Supreme Court unanimously held in Naranjo v. Spectrum Sec. Serv., Inc., S279397 (Decided 6 May 2024) that an employer’s “objectively reasonable, good faith belief” that it has...more
On Monday May 7, the California Supreme Court confirmed, in Naranjo v. Spectrum Securities Services, Inc., S279397.PDF (ca.gov), that penalties authorized under Labor Code Section 226 (“Section 226”) for “knowing and...more
The California Supreme Court concluded that the “good faith” defense applies to claims seeking to impose penalties under California Labor Code section 226. An employee must show that an employer’s failure to comply with...more
For the second time, the California Supreme Court issued a ruling in Naranjo v. Spectrum Security Systems in May. In May 2022, the California Supreme Court issued its first decision in Naranjo v. Spectrum Security Systems,...more
Employers finally received some welcome news from the California Supreme Court Monday and now have a better shot of successfully using a “good faith” defense to wage-and-hour lawsuits. According to the ruling, if an employer...more
In Huerta v. CSI Electrical Contractors, Case No. S275431 (Mar. 25, 2024), the California Supreme Court made several holdings relating to when non-exempt employees must be paid, including for time spent undergoing mandatory...more
In its recent opinion in Huerta v. CSI Electrical Contractors, the California Supreme Court addressed three inquiries posed by the 9th Circuit. These inquiries specifically relate to the definition of “hours worked” within...more
On March 25, 2024, the California Supreme Court issued a highly anticipated decision in Huerta v. CSI Electrical Contractors, Inc. The Court responded to the request from the Ninth Circuit to answer three questions about Wage...more
In Huerta v. CSI Electrical Contractors, No. S275431 (March 25, 2024), the California Supreme Court issued an important decision relating to whether California employers must pay non-exempt employees for certain pre-shift...more
On January 18, 2024, the California Supreme Court issued its long-awaited opinion in Jorge Luis Estrada et al. v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc., resolving a court of appeal split between the Second District (Wesson v. Staples...more
In Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills Inc., a unanimous decision by the California Supreme Court resolves a split between California courts of appeal by ruling that a trial court does not have inherent authority to strike PAGA...more
The California Supreme Court has issued its much-anticipated decision in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc., determining whether Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claims can be dismissed as unmanageable. The Court...more