At the end of 2011, the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (“DFEH”) released its Annual Report for 2010. It identifies some statistics that may be useful for employers, comparing results in 2010 with the previous three years. The numbers illustrate a clear effort by the DFEH to close cases as quickly and efficiently as
Legal Articles
California Court of Appeal Strikes Overtime Class Action Based On Due Process Concerns
Reversing a $15 million judgment against an employer in a class action for alleged unpaid overtime, the California Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, has held that the trial court’s trial management plan, which used sampling evidence to prove class liability, denied the employer due process by preventing it from defending against over 90% of…
Small Victory for Prevailing Employers Following Rejection of a Statutory Offer of Compromise
Recently, a California appeals court ruled that a prevailing defendant can recover fees paid to a plaintiff’s expert witness, rejecting the argument that fees may only be recovered for payments made to the employer/defendant’s own expert. The case, Chaaban v. Wet Seal, is the first California case to expressly rule on the issue. In…
The U.S. Supreme Court Refuses to Consider Decision on Whether NLRA Preempts Los Angeles Municipal Law
The U.S. Supreme Court recently declined to review a California Supreme Court ruling that the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”) did not preempt a Los Angeles city (“City”) ordinance. Cal. Grocers Ass’n v. Los Angeles (2011) 52 Cal. 4th 177; cert. denied Cal. Grocers Ass’n v. Los Angeles, 2012 U.S. LEXIS 1016 (U.S.…
California Employers Receive a Welcome Victory Regarding Commission Plans and the Limited Commission Exemption From Overtime
On January 24, 2012, California employers received a welcome victory regarding commission plans and the commission overtime exemption under Wage Orders 4 and 7. In Muldrow v. Surrex Solutions Corp., (CA4/1 Case No. D057955 1/24/12), the Fourth Appellate District of the Court of Appeal found that employment recruiters were eligible for the California commission…
California Continues to Regulate Arbitration Provisions
Employers are reminded that the procedure by which they enter into arbitration agreements with their employees is as important as the agreement’s language. A provision in an employment application requiring the applicant, but not the employer, to submit all disputes to arbitration was both procedurally and substantively unconscionable, and therefore unenforceable, the California Court of…
DLSE Issues Labor Code 2810.5 Notice in 6 Languages
The California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement ("DLSE") has released the form notice that is compliant with the new California Wage Theft Prevention Act of 2011 in six (6) languages. The notices are now available in: (1) English; (2) Vietnamese; (3) Chinese; (4) Korean; (5) Spanish; and, (6) Tagalog.
Click here for the DLSE Notice to Employee in 6 languages
…
California Appellate Court Decides Two Important Wage and Hour Issues on Reporting Time and Split Shift Pay
On December 21, 2011, a California appellate court made two important rulings regarding reporting time and split shift pay: First, non-exempt employees are not entitled to “reporting time pay” for attending scheduled meetings at work, even though no “usual” day’s work is performed, as long as the employee is paid for at least half of the …
Wage Theft Protection Act of 2011: DLSE Finally Released Form Notice and Frequently Asked Questions
The California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement ("DLSE") has released a Frequently Asked Questions and a form notice that is compliant with the new California Wage Theft Prevention Act of 2011. Effective January 1, 2012, the Act requires employers to provide many new employees with written notice that details their rates of pay, employer name…
California’s Long Arm of the Law: Ninth Circuit Follows California Supreme Court to Decide Oracle Case Against Employers Headquartered in California
California-based employers who send workers from other states into California must pay the employees pursuant to California law, not the law of the state where the employees reside, according to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Sullivan v. Oracle Corp. 06-56649 (9th Cir. Dec. 13, 2011).
In Sullivan, Oracle hired “Instructors&rdquo…