Rocha v. U-Haul Co. of Cal., 88 Cal. App. 5th 65 (2023)
Thomas and Jimmy Rocha alleged FEHA and Labor Code violations against their employer U-Haul. The brothers’ individual PAGA claims were compelled to arbitration where they subsequently lost on all causes of action. The Rochas then moved to vacate the arbitrator’s award, but the trial court confirmed the award and imposed sanctions. The
Last summer, we reported here the California Supreme Court ruling that premium payments owed under Labor Code section 226.7 for meal and rest break violations constitute “wages.” The Naranjo et al. v. Spectrum Sec. Servs., Inc., 13 Cal. 5th 93, 102 (2022) decision had significant ramifications because it triggered related obligations for employers to report the premiums on employee wage statements, pay employees these
In the California Legislature’s latest attack on the fast-food industry, Assemblymember Chris Holden (D-Pasadena) introduced the Fast Food Franchisor Responsibility Act (“AB 1228”). AB 1228 was introduced shortly after a Sacramento County Superior Court judge issued a preliminary injunction to stop the controversial Fast Food Accountability and Standards Recovery Act or “FAST Recovery Act” (AB 257) from taking effect, pending a vote by
On January 13, 2023, a Sacramento County Superior Court judge issued a preliminary injunction to stop the controversial Fast Food Accountability and Standards Recovery Act or “FAST Recovery Act” (AB 257) from taking effect, pending a vote by California voters. Previously, on December 30, 2022, the court had issued a temporary restraining order against the new law, which was signed by Gov. Newsom
On January 1, 2023, the IRS mileage rate increased to 65.5 cents per mile for driving done for business purposes. This is a three (3) cent increase from the rate set for the second half of 2022. According to the IRS, this rate applies “to electric and hybrid-electric automobiles, as well as gasoline and diesel-powered vehicles” and was calculated “based on an annual study
California employers are required to post several notices and distribute various pamphlets informing employees of their employment rights. Effective January 1, 2023, eight (8) out of eighteen (18) of these required notices will be updated. The eight (8) notices that will be updated are the following:
1. California Minimum Wage;
2. Family Care and Medical Leave and Pregnancy Disability Leave;
3. Your Rights and Obligations
A California court has ruled that an arbitrator (not a judge) should decide on the applicability of California Labor Code Section 925 to a dispute between a law firm partner and his former law firm. Zhang v. Superior Court, 2022 WL 16832570 (Cal. Ct. App. 2022). This ruling potentially undermines the protections of Labor Code Section 925, which permits an employee to
To properly calculate the overtime rate for a non-exempt employee, employers must first calculate the “regular rate of pay.” Under federal law, and the laws of most states, the regular rate is determined by dividing the employee’s total weekly remuneration (except for a handful of categories that are specifically excluded, such as gifts and payments for non-working hours) by the total number of hours actually worked by the employee that week. But certain states, including California, require a different calculation—one that, depending on the nature of the compensation, can only be divided by some, but not all, of the total hours worked in the week.
In the continuously evolving whistleblower retaliation standard we previously reported on earlier this year here and here, the Ninth Circuit has now weighed in on California Labor Code section 1102.5 in Killgore v. Specpro Pro. Serv., LLC, No. 21-15897.
In holding that a consultant on an environmental project for the U.S. Army Reserve Command raised a genuine dispute of fact over whether he
A decade ago, a California Court of Appeal held that employers lawfully could round employees’ time punches if the rounding policy was neutral on its face and as applied. See See’s Candy Shops, Inc. v. Super. Ct., 210 Cal. App. 4th 889 (2012). In arriving at this conclusion, the See’s Court relied on regulations under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) and the