An employment arbitration agreement that incorporated the American Arbitration Association’s National Rules for the Resolution of Employment Disputes vested the arbitrator with the power to decide whether the agreement authorized class-wide relief, the California Court of Appeal has ruled. Universal Protection Service LP v. Superior Court, No. C078557 (Cal. Ct. App. Aug. 18, 2015). The Court denied an employer’s petition to set aside the trial court’s order compelling class arbitration and ordered that the arbitrator should determine the class issue. Continue Reading California Court Holds Arbitrator Decides Class Arbitrability Where Agreement Specifies AAA Rules

If a background check includes information about a job applicant’s character, California’s background check law applies, the California Court of Appeal has held, rejecting an employer’s challenge to the California Investigative Consumer Reporting Agencies Act (Cal. Civ. Code § 1786 et seq.) (“ICRAA”). Connor v. First Student, Inc., No. B256075 (Cal. Ct. App. Aug. 12, 2015). Continue Reading Constitutional Challenge to California’s Background Check Law Rejected

A California federal judge dismissed a putative employment collective action last week, brought by individuals who wrote reviews on Yelp, a popular online business rating website predicated on user-reviews, holding that an individual who acts for personal pleasure without a promise of pay does not have a claim for wages under federal labor law. Jeung, et al., v. Yelp, Inc., Case No. 15-cv-02228-RS, U.S.Dist. (N.D. Cal. 2015). Continue Reading Common Sense Prevails as Court Knocks Out Yelp Reviewers’ Class Action Seeking Pay for Voluntary Online Reviews

Employers with operations in California – from established corporations to emerging and startup companies – face unique challenges. California law often sets the national trend with employment law developments predating changes across the country. Our biannual breakfast series consists of interactive seminars offered throughout the Golden State aimed at helping participants learn about the latest legal developments and explore ways they may avoid liability by developing preventive strategies. We encourage human resources executives and professionals, in-house counsel and chief executive officers to attend. Continue Reading You Won’t Want to Miss This! The California Workplace Law Breakfast Series End of Year Update

Four drivers who transported cargo from the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles were misclassified as independent contractors and subjected to illegal paycheck deductions, a California Court of Appeal has held.  Garcia et al. v. Seacon Logix, Inc., No. B248227 (July 16, 2015) (unpublished).  This case reiterates a simple, yet important principle of employment law: notwithstanding the express language in an “Independent Contractor Agreement,” workers are employees—and not independent contractors—if the business controls the manner and means of their work.  Continue Reading California Court of Appeal Affirms Expense Reimbursement Award to Misclassified Employees

A depressed employee who was fired for threatening to kill his co-workers was not a qualified individual entitled to protection under the Americans with Disabilities Act, as the employee could not perform essential job functions, with or without an accommodation, a federal appeals court in San Francisco has ruled, affirming judgment in favor of the employer. Mayo v. PCC Structurals, Inc., No. 13-35643 (9th Cir. July 28, 2015). The Ninth Circuit has jurisdiction over Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington. Continue Reading Death Threats Against Co-Workers Defeat Employee Disability Discrimination Claim, Federal Court Rules

Co-hosted by Juniper Networks and Jackson Lewis P.C., the Collaboratory Series offers interactive workshops designed to highlight “real life” compliance issues and solutions for employers. 2015 has been another year for groundbreaking new decisions and rules from the National Labor Relations Board. Not only did the “quickie election” rule go into effect on April 14th, but the Board has also continued to redefine workplace law in other significant ways. In this session, we will discuss the law, trends and recommendations for employer consideration. Continue Reading Complimentary Silicon Valley Labor Seminar on September 9, 2015

California employers are required to have a written and effective Injury and Illness Prevention Program (IIPP). Violations of IIPPs account for the highest portion of all California workplace health and safety citations every year, costing employers time and hundreds of thousands of dollars in penalties. In particular, section 3203(a) violations – the section of California law requiring employers to implement an effective IIPP and to document hazard training given to employees – is an area of liability that many employers can proactively avoid. Continue Reading California Summer E-Series Webinar: How to Avoid Cal/OSHA’s Most Commonly Violated Standard and Develop an Effective IIPP

IMG_0252On July 31, 2015, Associate Stephanie Yang met with Luo Linquan, the Consul General of the People’s Republic of China in San Francisco. The meeting was conducted in collaboration with the Silicon Valley Chinese Technology and Business Association (SVCTBA) as part of a larger initiative to increase collaboration between the Chinese government and the U.S. private sector and to introduce them to Bay Area businesses. In addition to Jackson Lewis, the Consul General met with financial services, wealth management, computer hardware, hospitality management and biotech companies.

If you have any questions about how the firm can assist Chinese businesses with employment law compliance in San Francisco, Silicon Valley or California, please contact Stephanie at +1 (415) 796-5486 or Stephanie.Yang@jacksonlewis.com.

An arbitration clause in a consumer agreement was enforceable, including the class action waiver, despite four supposedly one-sided arbitration provisions in the agreement, the California Supreme Court has held. Sanchez v. Valencia Holding Co., LLC, No. S199119 (Aug. 3, 2015). The much-anticipated decision has significant implications for arbitration agreements between employers and employees. Continue Reading California Supreme Court: Federal Arbitration Act Preempts Plaintiff’s State Rights