For the past 40 years, federal administrative agencies have enjoyed broad latitude in interpreting statutes passed by Congress. Known as “Chevron deference,” courts have routinely deferred to the agencies’ often politically motivated and even self-empowering interpretation of an otherwise ambiguous statute. This has led to a significant delegation (indeed, some would say surrender) of authority by the legislative and judicial branches to the executive
Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) has introduced the Thirty-Two Hour Workweek Act (the “Act”), a bill that, if enacted, would lower the threshold for a “standard” workweek by 20 percent, from 40 to 32 hours. Should the Act become law, it would have a significant impact on employers not just in California but across the nation. (Of course, there’s always a California connection—companion legislation, H.R. 1332
A federal court in New York has held that a Broadway musical’s casting decisions—specifically replacing one actor with another actor of a different race—are shielded by the First Amendment from employment discrimination claims, in a decision that could have implications across the entertainment industry.
In Moore v. Hadestown Broadway LLC, the plaintiff, a Black woman, brought race discrimination and retaliation claims under federal and
On February 14, 2024, California State Senator Lola Smallwood-Cuevas introduced Senate Bill 1137 (“SB 1137”), a bill that would make California the first state to specifically recognize the concept of “intersectionality.” Smallwood-Cuevas has stated that SB 1137 “makes it clear that discrimination not only happens based on one protected class, such as race, gender or age, but any combination thereof.”
Specifically, SB 1137 would amend
All eyes will be on the United States this November as Americans head to the polls in the upcoming 2024 general election. Likely to go somewhat less noticed among the Presidential, Senate, and House races this year is a California ballot initiative that would repeal (after 20 long years!) the Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004—better known as PAGA. (We previously reported in
California’s minimum wage is already one of the highest in the nation at $16 per hour (although Sacramento’s efforts pale in comparison to those of cities and towns across the Golden State, which have created a patchwork quilt of over 40 different minimum wage obligations up and down the state). Now, as we have previously reported here, the rate is set to increase by
On November 8, 2023, the California Supreme Court heard oral argument in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc., a case that could have profound implications for the future of Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) litigation. The Court granted review in order to decide whether courts have the power to strike or limit PAGA claims that would prove to be unmanageable at trial.
A prior
A California semiconductor manufacturer cannot pursue in court its claims of trade secret misappropriation against a rival company while simultaneously arbitrating the same claims against the allegedly larcenous employee, a state appeals court recently found.
In Mattson Technology, Inc. v. Applied Materials, Inc., a California Court of Appeal ruled that the trial court erred by not staying Applied Materials’ trade secret misappropriation claims against
Many California employers and their counsel remain blissfully ignorant of the latest “gotcha” law in California, which can easily derail an otherwise perfectly planned arbitration. Back in 2019, the California legislature, an implacable foe of arbitration agreements, set a booby trap for unsuspecting employers by requiring the timely payment of arbitration fees and costs on pain of “waiving” the right to arbitrate. (The same gotcha
In recent years, employees (and their lawyers) have taken a variety of approaches to challenging the enforceability of workplace arbitration agreements. One common tactic has been to claim that they “don’t remember signing it” and, therefore, should not be required to arbitrate their claims. And at least one Court in the Second Appellate District has accepted this excuse. See Gamboa v. Northeast Community Clinic