Serrano v. Aerotek, Inc., 21 Cal. App. 5th 773 (2018) Norma Serrano brought this putative class action against her employer (Aerotek), which placed her as a temporary employee with its client (Bay Bread). Serrano alleged violations of the Labor Code and of the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) based upon, among other things, Aerotek’s alleged … Continue Reading
Mora v. Webcor Constr., L.P., 20 Cal. App. 5th 211 (2018) Steven Mora filed this putative class action/PAGA claim against his former employer, Webcor Construction, for violation of the California wage statement statute (Cal. Lab. Code § 226(a)) based upon payments made to a union vacation trust fund authorized by the Labor Management Relations Act … Continue Reading
Khan v. Dunn-Edwards Corp., 19 Cal. App. 5th 804 (2018) Hamid H. Khan brought this lawsuit against his former employer pursuant to the Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (“PAGA”) based on the fact that his final paycheck (in contrast to all other wage statements he had received) did not include the start date for … Continue Reading
Lopez v. Friant & Assocs., LLC, 15 Cal. App. 5th 773 (2017) Eduardo Lopez filed this action seeking recovery of civil penalties under the Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (“PAGA”) for his employer’s failure to include the last four digits of its employees’ Social Security numbers or employee identification numbers on itemized … Continue Reading
Mendoza v. Nordstrom Inc., 865 F.3d 1261 (9th Cir. 2017) In response to three questions asked of it by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, the California Supreme Court opined as follows: A day of rest is guaranteed for each workweek. Periods of more than six consecutive days of work that … Continue Reading
Williams v. Superior Court, 3 Cal. 5th 531 (2017) Michael Williams was an employee of Marshalls of CA in Costa Mesa, California. After slightly more than a year of employment, Williams brought a representative action against Marshalls under the Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (“PAGA”), alleging Marshalls had failed to provide its … Continue Reading
Minnick v. Automotive Creations, Inc., 13 Cal. App. 5th 1000 (2017) Nathan Minnick, who had worked for only six months before his employment ended, sued his former joint employers under PAGA, alleging their vacation policy violated state law because it required employees who worked for less than one year to forfeit their vested vacation pay. The … Continue Reading
Bartoni v. American Med. Response W., 11 Cal. App. 5th 1084 (2017) Current and former employees of an ambulance service company sued their employer for unpaid meal and rest periods. The complaint alleges claims on behalf of a putative class as well as non-class claims under the Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (“PAGA”). The … Continue Reading
Porter v. Nabors Drilling USA, LP, 2017 WL 1404392 (9th Cir. 2017) Jeremy Porter, a former employee of Nabors Drilling, filed a complaint alleging various claims against Nabors, including a claim arising under the Private Attorney General Act (“PAGA”). After removing the action to federal court, Nabors moved to compel arbitration of all of Porter’s … Continue Reading
Gerard v. Orange Coast Mem. Med. Ctr., 9 Cal. App. 5th 1204 (2017) In this putative class/Private Attorney General Act (“PAGA”) action, Jazmina Gerard (and others) challenged a hospital policy that allowed health care employees who worked shifts longer than 10 hours to voluntarily waive one of their two meal periods, even if their shifts … Continue Reading
Silva v. See’s Candy Shops, Inc., 7 Cal. App. 5th 235 (2017) The Court of Appeal held that the trial court properly granted summary judgment to See’s Candy as to the class-certified claims for failure to properly pay wages as a result of the employer’s rounding and grace-period policies, based on expert testimony that employees … Continue Reading
Soto v. Motel 6 Operating, L.P., 4 Cal. App. 5th 385 (2016) Lidia Soto sued her former employer, Motel 6 Operating, L.P., for violation of Labor Code § 226(a) for failing to include the monetary value of accrued vacation pay in its employees’ wage statements. Soto sued in her individual capacity and also on behalf … Continue Reading
Around this time last year, Section 1197.5 of the California Labor Code was amended by S.B. 358 in order to “eliminate the gender wage gap in California.” Among other things, the amendment sought to increase wage transparency and made it more difficult for employers to defend against gender-based equal pay claims. On September 30, 2016, … Continue Reading
Alvarado v. Dart Container Corp. of Cal., 243 Cal. App. 4th 1200 (2016) According to Dart’s written policy, a $15 attendance bonus would be paid to any employee who was scheduled to work a weekend shift and completed the full shift. Hector Alvarado challenged Dart’s calculation of overtime payments and sued for violations of the … Continue Reading
Alcantar v. Hobart Serv., 800 F.3d 1047 (9th Cir. 2015) Joséluis Alcantar filed this action against his employer to represent a putative class of service technicians for the time spent commuting in the employer’s service vehicles from their homes to their jobsites and then back again. Alcantar also alleged failure to provide the technicians with … Continue Reading
This law amends Labor Code § 1197.5 (SB 358): Broader Prohibition of Gender Wage Differentials Enacted Currently, Section 1197.5 prohibits an employer from paying an employee at wage rates less than the rates paid to employees of the opposite sex in the same establishment for equal work. The amendment revises this prohibition, instead prohibiting an … Continue Reading
This law, which became effective immediately, amends the Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) to provide an employer with the right to cure a violation of the requirement that an employer provides its employees with the inclusive dates of the pay period and the name and address of the employer before an employee may bring a … Continue Reading
The latest legislative session has just ended, and, true to form, the California Legislature has added more than a dozen new laws affecting employers doing business in the nation’s largest state. These statutes are in addition to the other six new laws that we reported on in September: Signed legislation: Sick Leave: Accrual And Limitations Language … Continue Reading
On January 20, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court denied the petition for certiorari filed in CLS Transp. Los Angeles, LLC v. Iskanian, a case in which the California Supreme Court held that waivers of employees’ right to bring representative actions under California’s Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (“PAGA”) are unenforceable under state law. You … Continue Reading
When the California Supreme Court decided Iskanian v. CLS Transp. Los Angeles, LLC, 59 Cal. 4th 348 (2014), this June, some legal commentators assumed that employees could not waive pre-litigation claims under the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA). Those assumptions may have been premature. As we noted here, at least one federal court refused to … Continue Reading
The California Supreme Court’s decision in Iskanian v. CLS Transp. Los Angeles, LLC, (discussed here), held that class action waivers in arbitration agreements are enforceable under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) except as to claims that were made pursuant to the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA). PAGA allows aggrieved employees to represent other current and … Continue Reading
Duran v. U.S. Bank Nat’l Ass’n, 59 Cal. 4th 1 (2014) Plaintiffs in this case are loan officers for U.S. Bank (“USB”) who claim they were misclassified as exempt employees under the outside salesperson exemption. After certifying a class of 260 plaintiffs, the trial court devised a plan to determine the extent of USB’s liability … Continue Reading
Yesterday, the California Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision in Iskanian v. CLS Transp. Los Angeles, LLC, upholding class action waivers in employment arbitration agreements. This means that the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2011 opinion in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion is to be given full force and effect in the employment setting in California. That … Continue Reading
Commentators have quipped that class certification is so easy in California that with little effort a group of plaintiffs could certify even a ham sandwich. In fact, as we have discussed here, we have seen a proliferation of recent appellate decisions hinging class certification on the mere existence of an employer’s uniform policy – no … Continue Reading
