Remember when the workday ended at 5:00 pm?
In today’s always-on world, the “infinite workday” has quietly taken over—creeping into dinners, weekends, and even that quaint concept known as a “vacation.” With smartphones in every pocket and teams spread across multiple time zones, work now follows us everywhere. Microsoft’s 2025 Work Trend Index confirms what many leaders already sense: work is no longer confined by
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
For the second year in a row, California has avoided being “the worst in the nation,” but still managed to secure the unenviable third position on the American Tort Reform Foundation’s (“ATRF”) Annual Judicial Hellholes List.
The ATRF characterizes California as the “plaintiffs’ bar’s laboratory for finding new ways to expand liability,” highlighting several key judicial and legislative trends contributing to each Californian paying an
We invite you to review our newly-posted November 2023 California Employment Law Notes, a comprehensive review of the latest and most significant developments in California employment law. The highlights include:
Cecilia Arce worked as a certified nursing assistant at a skilled nursing facility. After her employer terminated her, she brought claims under the Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) that she worked through meal and rest periods and was not paid premiums she was owed for meal and rest breaks after her termination. The
Karen Hartstein represents a certified class of former Hyatt employees who were laid off after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020. The class alleged that Hyatt violated California law by failing to pay them immediately for their accrued vacation time and by failing to compensate them for the value of the
Julie Park and Danny Chung sued their former employer (NMSI, Inc., a residential mortgage lender) for $7.2 million in profit sharing and related amounts associated with NMSI’s alleged breach of contract, which the trial court granted in the form of prejudgment right to attach orders. NMSI argued that Park and Chung had failed