Photo of Cary G. Palmer

Cary G. Palmer is a principal in the Sacramento, California, office of Jackson Lewis P.C. He represents management in employment, labor and benefits law and related litigation. Cary has extensive class action experience. He also mediates class actions.

Cary practices before the state and federal courts in California, the United States Department of Labor, the United States Equal Opportunity Commission, the California Civil Rights Department, the California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, and the California Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board. He also defends management in statewide and nationwide class action and collective action litigation. Cary also defends management in litigation involving wrongful termination, reductions in force, discrimination, harassment, breach of contract, wage and hour, benefits, and other labor and employment-related actions. He also conducts employee and management training seminars, and provides proactive employment advice and counsel.

In early 2021, the 9th Circuit upheld federal preemption of California’s meal and rest break laws for interstate motor carrier drivers, in the consolidated case of International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration. In that matter, the 9th circuit held the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA)’s determination that

On September 29, 2022, California passed Assembly Bill (AB) 1601, which requires an employer of customer service employees in a call center to comply with the California Worker Adjustment and Retraining Act (Cal/WARN) requirements prior to a mass layoff, relocation, or termination of employees. Under this bill, a call center employer is prohibited from

The California Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District upheld the construction industry collective bargaining agreement exemption to the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) in Oswald v. Murray Plumbing and Heating Corporation.

Labor Code Section 2699.6

Under Labor Code section 2699.6, construction employees who perform work under a valid collective bargaining agreement (CBA)

In a recent decision, the California Court of Appeal held that the doctrine of exclusive concurrent jurisdiction applies to a Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) representative action in Shaw v. The Superior Court of Contra Costa County. The decision is good news for employers facing overlapping PAGA complaints.

Underlying Facts

On July 21, 2022,

Under California’s Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA), an “aggrieved employee” may bring a representative action on behalf of him or herself and other “aggrieved employees” for civil penalties for various violations of the California Labor Code. (Labor Code §§2698, et seq.)  PAGA cases have become increasingly more frequent for various reasons, including the fact

In 2020, a California district court granted a preliminary injunction to prevent enforcement of Assembly Bill 5 (“AB 5”) against motor carriers operating within California. AB 5 codified the judge-made “ABC test” for classifying workers as either employees or independent contractors. The district court concluded, “there is little question that the State of California has