The Labor Law Insider: NLRB Does a U-Turn on Make-Whole Settlement Remedies, Part II
Constangy Clips Ep. 4 - 3 Things that Keep your Labor and Employment Lawyer Up at Night
California Governor’s PAGA Deal: What Employers Need to Know - Employment Law This Week®
Clocking in with PilieroMazza: The Labor Equation: Pricing for Success
California Employment News: The Basics of Pay Exemptions
The Chartwell Chronicles: Employment Law
Podcast: California Employment News - The Basics of Wage Statement Compliance (Part 1)
#WorkforceWednesday: Whistleblower Regulations Increasing, #MeToo Bill Passes, Cyberfraud Risk Mitigation - Employment Law This Week®
The Labor Law Insider: Beware the Unfair Labor Practice - Not Just for Unions Anymore
What Should I Do If My Employer Failed to Pay Me Wages?
II-31- The Changing 9 to 5 From 1980 to Today
In recent months, we have seen a substantial uptick in class and collective actions filed against mine operators on behalf of current and former hourly miners (and other hourly field personnel) alleging violations of the Fair...more
At Meyers Nave, we prioritize assisting our clients in establishing and maintaining wage and hour policies that comply with legal standards. This includes implementing effective systems and processes to ensure all levels of...more
Kuciemba v. Victory Woodworks Inc., 14 Cal. 4th 993 (2023)... Adolph v. Uber Technologies Inc., 14 Cal. 5th 1104 (2023)... Woodworth v. Loma Linda University Medical Center, No. E072704, 2023 WL 4701976 (Cal. Ct. App. July...more
On September 13, 2022, the German Federal Labor Court (Bundesarbeitsgericht) ruled (1 ABR 22/21) that employers are required to record the working hours of their employees. The reasoning for the decision was published on...more
In a surprising decision of 13 September 2022 (1 ABR 22/21), the BAG ruled that companies are already obliged to introduce a system for recording working time. With this decision, the BAG has surpassed the German legislator:...more
Überraschend hat das Bundesarbeitsgericht (BAG) mit Beschluss vom 13. September 2022 (1 ABR 22/21) entschieden, dass für Unternehmen schon jetzt eine Verpflichtung zur Einführung eines Systems der Arbeitszeiterfassung...more
In the spirit of the season, we are using our annual "12 days of the holidays" blog series to address new California laws and their impact on California employers. On this seventh day of the holidays, my labor and employment...more
As technology has advanced, employers routinely rely on electronic timekeeping software to ensure accurate record keeping. Such software often includes a setting to round employees’ time (typically to the nearest quarter...more
California employers may not apply time-rounding procedures to meal period time entries, based on a recent California Supreme Court decision. ...more
In Donohue v. AMN Services, LLC, the California Supreme Court held that where employees’ time records reflect a missed, late or short meal break, a “rebuttable presumption” arises that a proper meal break was not provided....more
Taking a meal break in California is no simple affair. Culminating seven years of litigation involving one California employer, on February 25, 2021, the Supreme Court of California issued its unanimous opinion in Donohue v....more
On February 25, 2021, the California Supreme Court overturned an appellate court’s conclusion that employers could follow precedent and round meal and rest periods when applying a neutral rounding technique. Donohue v. AMN...more
On Thursday, February 25, 2021, the California Supreme Court in Kennedy Donohue v. AMN Services, LLC, effectively ended the usage of time-punch rounding policies in the context of employee meal periods. This decision will...more
If there were ever a time for California employers to have in place meal period policies and timekeeping practices for non-exempt employees that are compliant with California law, now is the time. California law requires that...more
Douglas Troester v. Starbucks Corporation (July 26, 2018) - On July 26, 2018, the California Supreme Court issued a decision entitled Douglas Troester v. Starbucks Corporation, No. S234969, which should be of concern to...more
Last Thursday, the California Supreme Court issued a ground-breaking decision that severely limits employers’ ability to rely on the ‘de minimis’ doctrine as a defense to not paying for minimal increments of off-the-clock...more
The California Supreme Court has rejected the federal Fair Labor Standards Act’s de minimis doctrine and put the burden on employers to account for “all hours worked.” Our Labor & Employment Group explains the court’s ruling...more
On July 26, 2018, the California Supreme Court issued its long-awaited opinion in Troester v. Starbucks Corp., __ P.3d __ (2018). In the days that have followed, legal headlines have lamented the presumed “death” of the de...more
On August 6, 2012, Douglas Troester, a former shift supervisor at a Starbucks location, filed a lawsuit against Starbucks in state court in Los Angeles, California. Mr. Troester filed his lawsuit on behalf of himself and a...more
Last week, in Troester v. Starbucks, a unanimous California Supreme Court held that California labor statutes and wage orders do not incorporate federal de minimis work exceptions. Yet, the Court declined to define when, if...more
In a long-awaited decision, the California Supreme Court rejected the federal de minimis doctrine, making clear that in any instance in which employees perform “minutes of work,” before or after their shifts, that time must...more
Last week, the California Supreme Court ruled in favor of a former Starbucks employee seeking compensation for time spent closing the store after clocking out. This decision in Troester v. Starbucks may limit the ability of...more
On July 26, 2018, the California Supreme Court issued its long awaited decision in Troester v. Starbucks Corporation (S234969) on whether California wage and hour law recognizes the de minimis doctrine established by the...more
• In Troester v. Starbucks Corporation, the California Supreme Court on July 26, 2018, resoundingly rejected the de minimis doctrine commonly applied under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) to claims for unpaid...more
Yesterday, the California Supreme Court issued its ruling in Troester v. Starbucks Corporation, and departed from federal law’s more employer-friendly version of the de minimis rule, which it characterized as stuck in the...more