Many (wise) California employers use arbitration agreements requiring employees to submit any future employment-related dispute to mandatory arbitration. Arbitration is typically favored by employers because it is cheaper, faster, and more private than litigation. There’s also the perception that arbitrators are more conservative and less emotional than jurors, which employers believe translates into more friendly… Read More
Posts Categorized In: Employment Litigation
The Beginning of the End for California’s Independent Contractor Law AB 5?
California’s strict independent contractor law known as AB 5 – which prohibits businesses from classifying a worker as an independent contractor unless they can pass all three prongs of the stringent “ABC Test” – may soon be a thing of the past. On March 17, 2023, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals concluded in Olson… Read More
Federal Court Blocks Implementation of CA’s Anti-Arbitration Statute AB 51
In a rare win for California employers the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled that AB 51 could not be enforced in California because it unduly burdened the right to agree to arbitration in violation of the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”). AB 51 is the California statute that, in effect, prevented employers for asking… Read More
Federal Court Rules that Gender Dysphoria is a Disability Protected the ADA
On August 16, 2022, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in Williams v. Kincaid that transgender people who experience gender dysphoria are protected from discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Gender dysphoria is a “discomfort or distress that is caused by a discrepancy between a person’s gender identity and that person’s sex… Read More
U.S. Supreme Court Delivers Bombshell PAGA Ruling in Favor of Employers
On June 15, 2022, in a blockbuster case known as Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, the U.S. Supreme Court finally answered a burning employment law issue here in California – whether California’s rule prohibiting the use of arbitration agreements to force an employee to waive her right to bring a representative action under PAGA… Read More
CA Supreme Court: Meal/Rest Period “Premium Pay” Is Wages
On May 22, 2022, the California Supreme Court held in Naranjo v. Spectrum Security Services, Inc. that premium payments owed by an employer to a non-exempt employee for missed meal/rest periods are “wages” and not penalties. Thus, when those premium payments are owed but not timely paid, the employer can be subject to additional penalties… Read More
#MeToo in 2022: New Restrictions on Employer Confidentiality Agreements
In 2018, in response to the #MeToo movement, California passed SB 820, the STAND (Stand Together Against Non-Disclosure) Act. SB 820 prohibited using confidentiality provisions in settlement agreements in cases involving claims of sexual assault, sexual harassment, and workplace harassment or discrimination based on sex. We blogged about SB820 previously here. After SB 820 became… Read More
Federal Court Reinstates Ban on Employment Arbitration Agreements in California – For Now
In 2019, AB 51 is Passed As readers of this blog know, in 2019 the California legislature passed AB 51, a new law that added Section 432.6 to the California Labor Code. This new statute made it illegal for an employer to require an applicant or employee, as a condition of employment, to sign an… Read More
Meal and Rest Period Violations Just Got More Expensive for Employers
Under existing California law, if an employee who is eligible for a meal period is denied that meal period or gets interrupted during that meal period, then that employee is entitled to one hour of premium pay at the employee’s then-existing “regular rate of pay.” The same is true for rest periods. If an employee… Read More
Close Only Counts in Horseshoes and Hand Grenades – Not Meal Periods
In the most significant meal periods decision in almost ten years, the California Supreme Court on February 25, 2021 decided Donohue v. AMN Services, LLC. While the Court in Donohue made clear that as long as meal periods are provided, employers do not have to “police” employees and force them to take meal periods, the… Read More
