We invite you to review our newly-posted March 2023 California Employment Law Notes, a comprehensive review of the latest and most significant developments in California employment law. The highlights include:

Clarkson v. Alaska Airlines, Inc., 59 F.4th 424 (9th Cir. 2023)

Under the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA), employers are required to provide employees who take military leave with the same non-seniority rights and benefits as colleagues who take comparable non-military leaves. Casey Clarkson, a pilot for Alaska Airlines and a military reservist, alleged that the airline’s failure to provide paid

Existing law provides employment protections for members of the National Guard who have been ordered into active state or federal service. Among other things, the member of the National Guard is entitled to be restored to his or her former position or to a position of similar seniority, status and pay without loss of retirement or other benefits unless the employer’s circumstances have so changed

Haligowski v. Superior Court, 200 Cal. App. 4th 983 (2011)

While employed by Safway Services, Inc., Lieutenant Mario Pantuso was called to active duty with the United States Navy. When Pantuso returned from his six-month deployment in Iraq and asked for his job back, his immediate supervisor and the regional manager informed him that he was terminated from employment. Pantuso sued Safway and the

Opinion of Att’y Gen. Bill Lockyer, No. 02-213, 2003 WL 174019 (Jan. 24, 2003)

In this opinion, the California Attorney General determined that employees who are residents of and employed in California are not entitled to the employment-related benefits established under California Military & Veterans Code § 395.05 for leaves of absence occasioned by service in another state’s militia. The Attorney General observed that