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
The Fifth District Court of Appeal held that under pre-reform PAGA, headless PAGA actions in which plaintiffs seek civil penalties only on behalf of other employees and not for violations they personally experienced are...more
The Second District Court of Appeal held that, under the pre-reform PAGA statute, an individual employee need not have been employed or experienced a Labor Code violation during the one-year PAGA limitations period to have...more
PAGA claims brought under pre-reform PAGA must be brought within one year of a Labor Code violation experienced by the plaintiff and because a PAGA claim necessarily has both an individual and a non-individual component,...more
In an effort to avoid arbitrating individual claims under the Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”), a recent trend emerged in California litigation involving “headless” PAGA lawsuits. Essentially, plaintiffs would expressly...more
In a significant development for California employers, the California Court of Appeal’s decision in Leeper v. Shipt, Inc. closed out 2024 by strengthening the enforceability of arbitration agreements in Private Attorneys...more
In a welcome win for employers, the California Supreme Court recently blocked a PAGA plaintiff’s attempt to intervene and object to another PAGA plaintiff’s proposed settlement as a matter of right, in Turrieta v. Lyft, Inc.,...more
On January 18, 2024, the California Supreme Court issued a highly anticipated decision in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc., determining whether trial courts can dismiss Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claims as...more
In Arias v. Superior Court, 46 Cal. 4th 969 (2009), the California Supreme Court ruled that Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) actions need not satisfy class action requirements, and in the fourteen years since, PAGA...more
Summary - Emergency Rule 9, which tolled statutes of limitations for six months due to the COVID-19 pandemic, is valid and operates to extend the time to file a civil suit for a PAGA claim as well as the time period to...more
What Happens to the “Non-individual” PAGA Claims Now that Viking River Cruises Compels Arbitration of the “Individual” PAGA Claim? The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana was widely seen...more
On February 7, 2022 a California Court of Appeal issued its decision in Hutcheson v. The Superior Court of Alameda County (UBS Financial Services, Inc.). The case addresses the relation back doctrine in the context of a...more
On February 7, 2022, a California appellate court issued the latest decision regarding the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA). Representative PAGA actions, which typically involve a relatively brief statute of limitations,...more
Last year was a significant year for California’s Private Attorneys General Act (known as “PAGA”), the 18-year old wage-and-hour enforcement act that, according to one study, has generated over 20,000 lawsuits against...more
On September 9, 2021, a California Court of Appeal issued its ruling in Wesson v. Staples the Office Superstore, LLC, delivering a welcome victory to employers battling representative actions under the Private Attorneys...more
On September 9, 2021, the Second District of the California Courts of Appeal ruled in Fred Wesson v. Staples the Office Superstore, LLC that trial courts have “inherent authority” to strike claims under the California Private...more
In a win for employers, the U.S. Court of Appeal for the 9th Circuit just ruled that heightened penalties for subsequent violations under California’s Private Attorney General Act (PAGA) cannot be imposed until the employer...more
Garner v. Inter-State Oil Co., 52 Cal.App.5th 619, Cal. App. 3 Dist., June 26, 2020, as modified (Jul 23, 2020) - Plaintiff filed a class action alleging that his employer, Inter-State Oil Co., violated a variety of wage...more
Scalia v. Employer Solutions Staffing Group, LLC, 951 F.3d 1097 (9th Cir. 2020) - Summary: Neither the Fair Labor Standards Act nor federal common law provide an employer with a right to seek contribution or...more
Noori v. Countrywide Payroll & HR Solutions, Inc., 2019 WL 7183403 (Cal. Ct. App. 2019) - Mohammed Noori sued his former employer for violation of Cal. Lab. Code § 226(a) (setting forth certain very specific statutory...more
ZB, N.A. v. Super Ct. of San Diego Cty., 8 Cal. 5th 175, 252 Cal. Rptr. 3d 228 (2019) - Summary: Employee may not recover unpaid wages under Labor Code section 558 through PAGA. Facts: Plaintiff Lawson worked for...more
This month’s key employment law cases address meal periods and payment of wages....more
This month’s key employment law cases address the test for independent contractor status, the legality of an incentive compensation system, and personal liability for wage and hour violations....more
The California Court of Appeals recently decided a new case potentially expanding the scope and impact of Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claims brought by an employee against his employer. In Huff v. Securitas Security...more
Last month, the California Court of Appeal determined in Khan v. Dunn-Edwards Corp., 2018 Cal.App. LEXIS 44 (Cal. App. 2d Dist. Jan. 4, 2018)(certified for publication), that a former employee’s claim under the Private...more
Lopez v. Routt, 17 Cal. App. 5th 1006, 225 Cal. Rptr. 3d 851 (2017) - Facts: Plaintiff sued her employer and supervisor for harassment in violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”). The matter...more