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…
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…
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…
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…
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…
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…
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…
California employers face even more liability now for misclassifying workers as “independent contractors.” That’s because the California Supreme Court recently ruled in Vasquez v. Jan-Pro Franchising, Inc. that the test for determining whether a worker qualifies as an employee or independent contractor – known as the “ABC Test”…
California’s Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) authorizes aggrieved employees to file lawsuits to recover civil penalties on behalf of themselves, other employees, and the State of California for violations of the California Labor Code. Lawsuits brought under PAGA have resulted in employers paying millions of dollars in penalties that…
In July, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on two important cases relating to religion and employment. In both decisions, the Court came down squarely on the side of religious freedom, ruling in favor of employers. In Our Lady of Guadalupe School, two teachers brought employment discrimination claims against their…