Insight & Commentary on California Workplace Law Issues & Developments
On June 15, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana that bilateral arbitration agreements governed by the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) may require arbitration of California Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claims on an individual basis only.
However, Justice Sotomayor’s concurring opinion in Viking River Cruises also seemingly included…
The underlying action, Naranjo v. Spectrum Security Services, was a class action brought by former and current employees, alleging violations of meal period violations. The plaintiffs sought not only premium wages for the violations but also waiting time penalties and penalties for failure to provide accurate wage statements. The results of the trial court…
Last year the California Supreme Court agreed to take up a question from the 9th Circuit regarding the evidentiary standard for whistleblower retaliation claims brought under California Labor Code section 1102.5. The California Supreme Court in Lawson v. PPG Architectural Finishes, Inc, held that Labor Code section 1102.6 “provides the governing framework for…
As 2021 draws to a close, here is a review of our articles about changes to California employment law that will continue to affect employers into 2022.
Legislative Changes
Statewide Right of Recall Bill Signed by Governor Newsom
New Legislation Signed Regarding Wage Theft
Expansion for CFRA Leave to Include Parents-in-Law and Modifications to DFEH…
The California Supreme Court has been busy in 2021 deciding cases that affect employers from how to pay meal and rest period penalties to when the statute of limitations for a failure to promote runs.
While the state’s high court answered some big questions in this last year, they still have several cases pertaining…
The Supreme Court of California recently issued two opinions assessing the breadth of California’s prevailing wage law.
Before the court in Mendoza v. Fonseca McElroy Grinding Co., Inc. was a specific question about whether California Labor Code section 1772 helped establish the scope of coverage by providing that workers employed “in the execution” of…
Is the California Supreme Court about to make it more difficult to dispose of whistleblower retaliation claims? That may well be the case. The Supreme Court has agreed to answer the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals’ question about California law and unlawful retaliation against an employee in Lawson v. PPG Architectural Finishes, Inc.…
While the California courts were relatively quiet during 2020, the California Supreme Court has a few heavy-hitting employment cases pending for 2021.
Here are the cases employers should be watching in the new year and why.
Donohue v. AMN Services, LLC
AMN Services (“AMN”) used a computer-based timekeeping system, which required employees such as Plaintiff…
In Kim v. Reins International California, Inc. 18 Cal.App.5th 1052 (2017), the California Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District held an employee-plaintiff that settled and dismissed his individual claims was no longer an “aggrieved employee” for purposes of standing to bring a claim for civil penalties under the Private Attorneys General Act…
Putting an end to employees’ backdoor attempts to recover unpaid wages in Private Attorneys General Act-only actions under California Labor Code Section 558, the California Supreme Court has ruled against allowing such claims. ZB, N.A., et al. v. Superior Court, No. S246711 (Sept. 12, 2019).
This is surprising, as the Court provided this much-needed guidance…
