No Waiver Of PAGA Representative Claims (Yet)

This week, the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari in connection with the California Supreme Court’s decision in Iskanian v. CLS Transportation Los Angleles, LLC.  Had the Court heard the Iskanian case, it was expected to find that representative claims under California’s Private Attorney General Act (PAGA) could be waived by an arbitration agreement, as has been approved with class action claims.  The U.S. Supreme Court, however, decided that it would not hear the dispute, leaving the holding in Iskanian to be good law, at least for now. Continue reading

Supreme Court Rejects Compensation For Antitheft Security Screenings, But Would A California Court Find Differently?

The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held this week that time spent by employees going through a post-shift security screening is not compensable time.  In a relatively brief and uncontroversial opinion, the Court found in Integrity Staffing Solutions v. Busk that workers at an Amazon warehouse in Nevada who were required to spend upwards of 25 minutes in an antitheft security screening could not bring a claim for unpaid wages under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).  Continue reading

The President’s Executive Actions on Immigration: What Employers Need To Know

On November 20, 2014 President Obama announced a set of immigration changes to be implemented by executive action within the parameters of current U.S. immigration laws.  The announcement was accompanied by a 33-page memorandum opinion from the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) explaining why the proposed executive action is legal. None of the proposals can take effect until sometime in 2015 after the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) develops detailed criteria and application procedures for each program. Meanwhile Congress could change all of this at any time by amending the U.S. Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). Continue reading

Supreme Court To Decide Religious Accommodation Case

Last year, we reported on a decision from a federal judge in San Francisco granting summary judgment to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in a case brought on behalf of a former Abercrombie & Fitch employee who was fired for wearing a hijab (a Muslim headdress for women) at work.   The judge in that case found that Abercrombie’s “Look Policy” was invalid insofar as it prohibited the employee from wearing a hijab and that Abercrombie’s belief that her dress would affect store performance or brand image was an “unsubstantiated opinion” that was not supported by hard evidence. Continue reading

FAQ About California’s New Sick Leave Law

In what is potentially the biggest change to California’s employment laws, beginning July 1, 2015, all California employers will be required to provide paid sick leave to all employees who have completed 90 days of work.  With enactment of the “Healthy Workplaces, Healthy Families Act of 2014,” California joins Connecticut as the only two states to require paid sick leave for employees. Continue reading

NLRB Ratifies Pre-Noel Canning Actions

Although many suspected that the Supreme Court would invalidate all actions taken by the National Labor Relations Board in Noel Canning v. NLRB, the question remained just how many of the NLRB’s actions would stand.  To this day, the NLRB’s decisions from January 4, 2012 to August 5, 2013 have no legal effect.  That includes the NLRB’s revolutionary decisions on social media, employee handbooks, arbitration agreements and internal investigations in non-union workplaces.   Continue reading

It’s Time to Revisit Commission Pay for California Employees: Commissions Earned Must be Paid Twice Per Month and the Commissioned Sales Exemption Gets Harder to Meet

You may have just started breathing easier after rolling out written commission agreements to comply with California Labor Code section 2751.  However, a recent unanimous California Supreme Court decision has heads turning and tongues wagging once again on this topic.  Continue reading

50 For 50: Five Decades Of The Most Important Employment Discrimination Decisions

Number 50: What Happens When a Boss “Likes” An Employee a Little Too Much?

As we conclude this 50 For 50 series, we look to the future of employment law.  As we see it, the biggest change in the workplace has been the emergence of social media.  According to recent surveys, nearly three-quarters of American adults use social media at work and one-third of those surveyed would refuse a job offer if they knew social media sites would be blocked at work.     Continue reading

50 For 50: Five Decades Of The Most Important Employment Discrimination Decisions

Number 49: EEOC Takes On Background Checks

Throughout this series, we have touched on facially neutral policies which, although not motivated by unlawful discrimination, have a discriminatory effect on certain protected classes.  For over 40 years, the courts have recognized this so-called “disparate impact” theory of discrimination. Continue reading