Yesterday, the California Supreme Court ruled in Augustus v. ABM Security Services, Inc. that employers must relieve employees of all work duties during their 10-minute rest breaks. This landmark decision now means that employers must treat rest breaks and meal breaks the same — and that employers must relinquish all control over employees during both… Read More
Posts Categorized In: Employment Agreements
California Employers Cannot Force Employees to Litigate or Arbitrate in Another State
California employment laws are some of the most pro-employee laws in the nation. That’s why so many large California employers, and their clever legal counsel, often try to get California employees to sign employment agreements that prohibit the employee from suing in this state (forcing them, instead, to have to sue in some other state… Read More
Governor Brown Signs SB 1007 Allowing Parties in Arbitration to Request Reporters for Hearings and Depositions
Last week, Governor Brown Signed SB 1007, which gives the parties to an arbitration “the right to have a certified shorthand reporter transcribe any deposition, proceeding, or hearing as the official record.” This new law requires the party who wants to the reporter make his/her/its request in a “demand, response, answer, or counterclaim related to… Read More
California Legislature Approves AB 465 — Future of Employment Arbitration Agreements in Doubt in California
Recently, the California Legislature passed AB 465 which prevents employers from requiring employees to sign mandatory pre-employment arbitration agreements as a condition of employment. This bill, which is now sitting on Governor Brown’s desk awaiting his signature, adds a new provision of the California Labor Code making it illegal to: “Require another person to waive… Read More
CA Legislature Passes AB 465 Abolishing Arbitration Agreements
The California Senate and Assembly recently passed AB 465 which prevents employers from asking employees to sign a mandatory arbitration agreement as a condition of employment. This new bill, which is now on Governor Brown’s desk, would add a new provision to the California Labor Code that would make it illegal to: “Require another person… Read More
California Court Refuses to Enforce Texas Choice of Law and Forum Selection Clause
California employers sometimes try to avoid the employee-friendly rules embedded in California law by inserting choice of law clauses into employment contracts. These clauses stipulate that, in the event of a dispute between the employer and employee, the laws of the State of Texas (or some other employer-friendly state) shall govern the dispute. In addition,… Read More
CA Supreme Court Upholds Class Action Waivers
In 2007, the California Supreme Court ruled in Gentry v. Superior Court that class action waivers in employment arbitration agreements are invalid under certain circumstances. Four years later, however, the United States Supreme Court reached a seemingly opposite conclusion in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, holding that “requiring the availability of classwide arbitration interferes with fundamental… Read More
CA Supreme Court Reverses Prior Decision in Sonic Calabasas v. Moreno
On October 17, 2013, the CA Supreme Court overturned its February 2011 decision in Sonic Calabasas v. Moreno (“Sonic I”). Unfortunately, however, the dense, scholarly, 73-page opinion — known as Sonic Calabasas v. Moreno II (“Sonic II”) — gives little clarity to California employers trying to craft defensible, enforceable arbitration agreements. Background In the original Sonic… Read More
NLRB Rules Proprietary Information and Non-Disparagement Clauses in Non-Union Employment Agreement are Overbroad and Illegal
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has issued another decision striking down a private, non-union employment agreement. The Quicken Loans, Inc. Decision In this most recent case, Quicken Loans, Inc. (Case No. 28-CA-75857), the administrative law judge ruled that Quicken violated the National Labor Relations Act (the “Act”) by maintaining “overly broad and discriminatory rules”… Read More
California Courts Remain Hostile to Non-Compete Agreements
A California Court of Appeal recently ruled that a non-compete given in connection with the sale of a business was unenforceable. Fillpoint, LLC v. Maas, 2012 Cal. App. LEXIS 904. Specifically, the Court held that because the non-compete period began on the date of the employee’s termination from the successor company — rather than on… Read More