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 new year brings new employment laws for California employers.  California employers will want to begin revising employee policies and handbooks now, so that they are prepared to comply with these new laws when the majority of them go into effect on January 1, 2023.  Here are five new employment laws that every California employer should know:

AB 1041 (Expanded Definition of “Family Member” for

If you haven’t ridden one yet, it’s likely you’ve had one fly by you on the sidewalk. Electric scooters – or e-scooters – have quickly descended upon most major cities in America. These app-based scooters let a user ride across the city at up to 15 m.p.h. and then discard the scooter wherever the rider happens to disembark. While relatively new, injuries from riding these

As we previously blogged, Assembly Bill 2337 (approved by the Governor last fall) will go into effect on July 1, 2017, and California employers will be required to give written notice of workplace rights that must be provided to victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, and stalking. The Labor Commissioner has just posted a form that employers may elect to use to comply with

In May 2017, the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) approved new regulations regarding transgender identity and expression in the workplace. The regulations become effective July 1, 2017.

The new rules further expand the Fair Employment and Housing Act’s (FEHA) role in preventing discrimination in employment and housing on the basis of gender identity. In addition, the regulations describe some new policies that

We recently blogged about Governor Brown signing S.B. 1241, which is now codified as Section 925 of the California Labor Code. The law, which affects venue and choice of law provisions in agreements entered into as a condition of employment, will begin applying to agreements entered into, modified, or extended beginning on January 1, 2017. The text of the law (posted directly below) might appear relatively straight forward, but certain ambiguities and questions concerning the law’s implementation raise several issues, which are discussed in this blog post.

In the past, a California employer could freely inquire about and consider a job applicant’s history of criminal convictions in determining any condition of employment including hiring, promotion, or termination. Although California law prohibited employers from asking about or considering arrests or detentions that did not result in convictions, the law did not impose any restrictions regarding what types of convictions employers could ask about

In recent years, some employers doing business in the Golden State have required their employees to sign arbitration and employment agreements that require the employee to sue or arbitrate in – or under the law of – another state.  After January 1, 2017, this practice will be illegal unless the employee was represented by legal counsel who assisted in negotiating the out-of-state venue, forum or

Are your employee handbooks and policies collecting dust? In the highly regulated workplace, human resource professionals, compliance officers, IT, and their counsel must work together to ensure that employee handbooks and policies reflect current best practices in light of expanding employment laws and regulations. In this interactive webinar, you will learn:

• Best practices for employee handbooks and policies

• How to avoid liability when

A California court has ruled that an employee’s emails with her lawyer over the company’s computer system were not privileged because they “were akin to consulting with her lawyer in her employer’s conference room, in a loud voice, with the door open, so that any reasonable person would expect that their discussion of her complaints about her employer would be overheard.” Holmes v. Petrovich Dev. Co., 2011 WL 117230 (Cal. Ct. App. 2011).