On August 12, 2019, in White v. Square, Inc.. the California Supreme Court answered a novel question — that is, can a plaintiff who has only visited a business’s website but has neither engaged the business’s services, bought any products, or visited the business’ bricks-and-mortar store sue for alleged violation of California’s Unruh Civil Rights… Read More
Posts Categorized In: Employment Litigation
Recent FEHA Amendment on Fee-Shifting is Retroactive
As a direct response to the “Me Too” movement, California enacted a number of new laws in 2018 regarding workplace sexual harassment. This wave of legislation included an amendment to the section of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”) governing fee and cost awards, which was intended to make it more difficult for prevailing… Read More
Independent Contractors Remain Dangerous for California Employers
As we blogged about last year here, in May 2018 the California Supreme Court issued a landmark decision in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court and dramatically changed the standard for determining whether California workers could be classified as employees or independent contractors. One key question that the Dynamex court explicitly refused to decide was whether… Read More
Employers Can Use Anti-SLAAP Statute to Force Early Screening of Some Employee Claims
California’s anti-SLAPP statute — found in Code of Civil Procedure §425.16 — allows a defendant to request early judicial screening of a legal claim that targets that defendant’s protected free speech or petitioning activities. Until yesterday, it has been an open question in California as to whether or not California’s anti-SLAPP statute could be used… Read More
California Bans Hairstyle Discrimination
On July 3, 2019, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed SB 188 — also known as the CROWN Act — and made California the first state in the country to outlaw discrimination based on “natural hair,” including afros, braids, twists, and locks. CROWN stands for Creating a Respectful and Open Workplace for Natural hair. According to… Read More
Clever Contract Language Cannot Defeat Labor Code 218.5’s Fee-Shifting Effect
Under existing California law, an employee who prevails on his/her claims against an employer for non-payment of wages is entitled to recover his/her attorneys’ fees in addition to the unpaid wages owed. But the same is not true for an employer who prevails. Under existing California law, an employer is not entitled to recover its… Read More
SCOTUS Rules Employees Cannot Band Together in Class Arbitrations
In yet another split 5-4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Lamps Plus v. Varela that employees at a California business could not band together in a class-wide arbitration. Instead, the Supreme Court ruled, each employee was required to proceed independently in an individual arbitration. The Supreme Court acknowledged that the arbitration agreement that… Read More
One Day, Two Opposite Results in Arbitration Cases
On the same day, two different California appellate courts reached opposite conclusions as to whether an employer’s arbitration agreement was enforceable or not. Subcontracting Concepts v. DeMelo — Arbitration Agreement Void and Unenforceable In one case, Subcontracting Concepts, LLC v. DeMelo, the Court found that the arbitration agreement was both procedurally and substantively unconscionable and, therefore, unenforceable…. Read More
Employers Catch a Break on Wage Statement Requirements
Under California Labor Code §226(a), California employers are required to provide wage statements to employees that contain 9 different pieces of information. One of the requirements is that the wage statement must show “the name and address of the legal entity that is the employer.” Given the statute’s use of the term “legal entity,” most California… Read More
An Employee’s Single PAGA Claim Cannot Be Split into Arbitration and Litigation Pieces
Back in 2014, the California Supreme Court ruled in Iskanian v. CLS Transportation Los Angeles that an individual employee who has signed a mandatory arbitration agreement may be compelled to arbitrate his “individual damages claims.” However, if that employee joins a representative PAGA claim to his other damages claims, that PAGA claim cannot be sent to arbitration… Read More
