On Thursday, the California Supreme Court ruled that employees must be paid for time spent undergoing security checks before leaving work.
Continue Reading California Supreme Court Holds Time Spent On Bag Checks Is Compensable
California Appellate Court Rules that a Service Charge Could Be a Gratuity under the Labor Code
A recent California appellate court decision has held that a banquet hall’s “mandatory service charge” could, under the right circumstances, be a “gratuity” that must be paid to employees under California Labor Code § 351.
Continue Reading California Appellate Court Rules that a Service Charge Could Be a Gratuity under the Labor Code
The US Chamber of Commerce Slams Controversial Hundred Million Dollar Award Against Wal-Mart in Wage Statement Dispute
The US Chamber of Commerce, along with two other business-oriented groups, recently filed an amicus brief urging the Ninth Circuit to overrule a $102 million judgment against Wal-Mart.
Continue Reading The US Chamber of Commerce Slams Controversial Hundred Million Dollar Award Against Wal-Mart in Wage Statement Dispute
California Court Holds On-Call Scheduling Means Reporting Time Pay for Employees
The California Second Appellate District has held that retail employees who were required to “call in” two hours before their scheduled shift to find out if they actually needed to report to work were entitled to reporting time pay.
Continue Reading California Court Holds On-Call Scheduling Means Reporting Time Pay for Employees
California Clarifies Its Law Banning Inquiries into Applicants’ Salary History
California was one of the leading states to tackle pay discrimination by banning inquiries into salary history. California Labor Code Section 432.2, which went into effect on January 1, 2018, prohibits public and private employers from seeking or relying upon the salary history of applicants for employment. But some of the law’s terms were undefined and some of the provisions were unclear, so after Section 432.2 went into effect, employers had questions about how to remain compliant with the law when hiring new employees. Acknowledging the need for clarity, Governor Jerry Brown signed an amendment into law on July 18, 2018.
Continue Reading California Clarifies Its Law Banning Inquiries into Applicants’ Salary History
New Headaches For California Employers On Overtime Calculations
The California Supreme Court issued a decision Monday in a case that is sure to cause headaches for employers when compensating employees through flat sum bonuses.
Continue Reading New Headaches For California Employers On Overtime Calculations
California Employers: Are You Compliant with 2018’s New Laws?
The new year brings new laws for California employers to grapple with. We highlight the most significant new employment laws affecting California employers as of January 1, 2018. Companies based in California or with operations in California are encouraged to review their policies and procedures in light of these developments.
Continue Reading California Employers: Are You Compliant with 2018’s New Laws?
California Adopts Revised Pregnancy Disability Leave Regulations
California’s Fair Employment and Housing Commission recently amended its regulations to the state’s Pregnancy Disability Leave Law. The new regulations provide expanded protections and clarifications with regard to employer obligations related to Pregnancy Disability Leave (“PDL”). The regulations take effect on December 30, 2012.
Continue Reading California Adopts Revised Pregnancy Disability Leave Regulations
California Appeals Court Allows Drivers To Move Forward With Litigation
A 2-1 California Court of Appeal held on October 17 that drivers for a food service provider did not have to arbitrate their state statutory claims brought under the California Labor Code despite a binding arbitration agreement covering the “application or interpretation” of the driver agreements. The drivers alleged that their employer, Mike Campbell & Associates, misclassified them as independent contractors, denying them wage law protections under the California Labor Code, and was thus liable for nonpayment of wages, illegal deductions, and recordkeeping violations. Rather than challenge the trial court’s ruling that they were bound by the arbitration clause, the drivers argued that their statutory claims did not arise out of the arbitration agreement and thus did not require an interpretation of the arbitration clause.
Continue Reading California Appeals Court Allows Drivers To Move Forward With Litigation
Plaintiffs Not Sitting Still When It Comes To Filing “Suitable Seating” Class Actions In California
The Bright v. 99 Cents Only Stores decision, issued by the California Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District last November, illustrates a recent wage and hour class action litigation trend against retail employers in California over lack of “suitable seating” for their employees. The California Supreme Court denied review of this case in February 2011.