Seyfarth Synopsis: The Supreme Court just held that employers, when calculating the premium pay due for failing to provide legally compliant meal and rest periods, must include all nondiscretionary payments—not just pay the...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Supreme Court has held that an individual may not seek unpaid wages under Labor Code section 558. Section 558 can be invoked only by the Labor Commissioner or by an individual suing under...more
9/20/2019
/ Appeals ,
Arbitration ,
Arbitration Agreements ,
CA Supreme Court ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Employment Contract ,
Employment Litigation ,
Labor Code ,
Motion to Compel ,
Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) ,
Unpaid Wages ,
Wage and Hour
Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Supreme Court invalidated an employment arbitration agreement on August 29, 2019. At issue in OTO, LLC v. Kho was an agreement to arbitrate employment claims, including wage claims. Under the...more
9/11/2019
/ Arbitration ,
Arbitration Agreements ,
Berman Hearings ,
CA Supreme Court ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Employment Contract ,
Employment Litigation ,
Fairness Standard ,
Federal Arbitration Act ,
Preemption ,
Unconscionable Contracts ,
Wage and Hour
Seyfarth Synopsis: In Voris v. Lampert, the California Supreme Court held that unpaid wages cannot be recovered through a tort claim for conversion....more
8/27/2019
/ Alter Ego ,
CA Supreme Court ,
Compensation & Benefits ,
Conversion ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Employment Litigation ,
Failure To Pay ,
Hiring & Firing ,
Popular ,
Stocks ,
Unpaid Wages ,
Wage and Hour
Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Supreme Court, in Dynamex Operations v. Superior Court, held that “engage, suffer or permit to work” determines employee status for Wage Order claims...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: In Mendoza v. Nordstrom, Inc., the Supreme Court resolved three unsettled questions concerning how to read California’s “day of rest” statutes: Employees are entitled to one day of rest during each...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: No California contractual provision, including one in an arbitration agreement, can waive the statutory right to seek injunctive relief to protect the general public. McGill v. Citibank, N.A. (April 6,...more
4/13/2017
/ Arbitration ,
Arbitration Agreements ,
Banking Sector ,
CA Supreme Court ,
Citibank ,
Class Action ,
Class Action Arbitration Waivers ,
CLRA ,
Consumer Contracts ,
Federal Arbitration Act ,
Injunctive Relief ,
Preemption ,
Unfair Competition Law (UCL)
Seyfarth Synopsis: Under Labor Code section 202, California employers must pay all wages to an employee who “quits” within 72 hours, unless the employee has given 72 hours’ notice of the intent to quit, in which case the...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Supreme Court, in Sandquist v. Lebo Automotive, deviated from rulings of most federal circuit courts to hold that the question of “who decides” whether class arbitration is available—courts...more
8/2/2016
/ Arbitration ,
Arbitration Agreements ,
CA Supreme Court ,
Class Action ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Federal Arbitration Act ,
Harassment ,
Motion to Compel ,
Pre-Employment Agreements ,
Race Discrimination ,
Retaliation
Many companies doing business in California have had difficulty persuading California courts to enforce their arbitration agreements. Those courts often have used the doctrine of unconscionability to deny enforcement on the...more