Whatever good intentions its proponents may claim, the Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (PAGA) created perverse incentives for plaintiff’s lawyers to file representative actions seeking civil penalties for violations of the California Labor Code on behalf of all “aggrieved employees” of …›
A California bill that has emerged from the #MeToo movement and is likely to increase employers’ costs and exposure in defending harassment claims will take effect on January 1, 2019. As briefly discussed in our October 2018 Employment Law Commentary, California Governor Jerry …›
The Fourth District Court of Appeals in San Diego on November 1, 2018, issued AMN Healthcare Inc. v. Aya Healthcare Services Inc., in which it called into question the continuing viability in California of employee non-solicitation clauses found in many employment contracts and proprietary …›
Another year has passed in the California Legislature, with new laws and amendments affecting California employers. Among the more significant changes, bills prompted by the #MeToo movement, including the new requirement that corporate boards of directors include women, have been passed. Other …›
On May 21, 2018, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis, holding that waivers of class and collective actions in arbitration agreements are enforceable under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). The Supreme Court’s decision resolves a …›
Managing employees’ leaves of absence is a tricky business for employers. While laws like the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and the California Family Rights Act (CFRA) provide a set amount of leave protection and are generally easy to follow, courts and agencies …›
It was another busy year in the California Legislature with regard to employment and labor issues. Of particular note for California employers are the new laws related to employee hiring practices with the prohibitions on requesting an employment applicant’s salary history information, limitations on …›
It took 124 years, but the California Supreme Court in Mendoza v. Nordstrom, Inc., No. S224611, 2017 WL 1833143 (Cal. May 8, 2017) finally addressed in detail California’s day-of-rest statutes (Labor Code Sections 551, et seq.) originally enacted in 1893. Such a seemingly simple …›
The Economic Policy Institute has reported that, in 2016, as many as 4 million workers nationwide wanted but were unable to obtain full-time work. While some have debated these numbers, the City of San Jose, California, has attempted to tackle the issue with a …›
In last February’s Employment Law Commentary, we discussed best practices for drafting separation agreements. Among the issues raised was a recent SEC enforcement action applying one of the Commission’s rules in a novel way to clamp down on contracts seen as chilling whistleblowing activity. …›