In a decision that many employers have been waiting for since the Ninth Circuit’s decision certifying a class of approximately 1.5 million women, the U.S. Supreme Court has rejected class action certification in “one of the most expansive class actions ever.” See Wal-Mart Stores v. Dukes, No. 10-277 (June 20, 2011). The case involved allegations of gender discrimination
The Ninth Circuit Has Revitalized The California Learned Professional Overtime Exemption and Remanded To A Jury Key Issues Under The Administrative Exemption
In 2009, companies who classified certain unlicensed accountants, engineers and other professions as exempt from overtime under the California Learned Professional Exemption were dealt a broadside by a federal District Court when it held that unlicensed accountants were categorically ineligible for the Learned Professional Exemption. The decision lead to numerous employers revaluating the Learned Professional
Employers Receive Another Positive Meal Period Decision From an Appellate Court
Rest and meal period cases continue to make headlines in California while employers await the California Supreme Court’s decision in Brinker Restaurant v. S. C., (review granted Oct. 22, 2008 (Brinker), and Brinkley v. Public Storage, (review granted Jan. 14, 2009 (Brinkley)).
In another positive decision for employers, the Second Appellate District Court upheld the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act Does Not Protect Disclosures to The Media
The Ninth Circuit held today that the whistleblower provision of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1514A(a)(1) (“SOX”), protects employees of publicly-traded companies who disclose certain information to three recipients: (1) federal regulatory and law enforcement agencies; (2) Congress; and, (3) employee supervisors. These three recipients are specifically enumerated in the law. The Court held that “leaks
Updates From the Front Lines of California Class Action Litigation and Practical Lessons
An employer who is strategic and proactive in California wage and hour compliance can avoid hundreds of thousands of dollars in potential liabilities and defense costs. For example, there is significant litigation regarding employment applications in California especially the limitations regarding criminal convictions set forth at California Labor Code Section 432.7, et seq. and Section
Statistical Evidence and Disparate Impact Claims – A Divided Ninth Circuit Rules Regarding Applicable Proof under the ADA and the California FEHA
A divided panel of judges at the Ninth Circuit held a plaintiff must demonstrate some statistically significant evidence in support of his or her disparate impact claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, even though such evidence may be very difficult to obtain. Lopez v. Pacific Maritime
The Ninth Circuit Rules Employers Have the Burden of Proof for Denying Reinstatement after FMLA Leave
The Ninth Circuit rules that an employer has the burden of proving it had a legitimate reason for not reinstating an employee to her former position after taking a leave pursuant to the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”). The Court also found that the employee need not demonstrate her employer lacked a reasonable
Explicit Mutual Wage Agreement for Straight Time and Overtime Upheld
The California Court of Appeals has held that a California employer did not owe overtime to an employee because it had entered into an explicit mutual wage agreement that provided for base compensation and overtime in one lump sum. Arechiga v. Dolores Press, Inc., No. B218171 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 7, 2011). Carlos Arechiga
Julie Su has been appointed Chief of the Division of Labor Standards and Enforcement
Governor Brown announced that Julie Su has been appointed as head of the California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement.
Here is the text of the announcement from the Governor’s website: “Julie Su, 41, of Cerritos, has been appointed Chief of the Division of Labor Standards and Enforcement. Su has worked at the Asian Pacific Legal Center