Gerald Groff, an Evangelical Christian, took a mail delivery job with the USPS at a time when postal service employees were was not required to work on Sundays. However, when the USPS began facilitating Sunday deliveries for Amazon, he was called upon to work Sundays, which ultimately resulted in his resignation from his
In 2014, the California Supreme Court determined that Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) claims are immune from arbitration in Iskanian v. CLS Transp. Los Angeles, LLC – which, unsurprisingly, led to an avalanche of PAGA claims being filed as plaintiffs’ lawyers scrambled to make their cases arbitration-proof (at least as to those pesky
As we reported (here), on June 15, 2022, a near unanimous U.S. Supreme Court held that the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) preempted the California Supreme Court’s controversial decision in Iskanian v. CLS Transportation Los Angeles, LLC, 59 Cal. 4th 348 (2014), which held that actions brought under the California Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) could not be divided into
On Monday, the Supreme Court issued a landmark 6-3 ruling that held that an employer that fires someone for being gay or transgender violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.
Anthony Oncidi joins XpertHR Legal Editor David Weisenfeld to discuss the ruling’s significance, what it means for employers and what the next big workplace issue will be at the nation’s highest court.
On May 1, we reported on the California Supreme Court’s opinion in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court, in which the Supreme Court set forth the standard for determining if a worker may properly be classified as an employee or independent contractor. See Cal. Employment Law Blog (May 1, 2018). An issue that the Court did not address is whether its opinion should
Janus v. AFSCME, 585 U.S. ___, 2018 WL 3129785 (2018)
In a highly anticipated decision, the United States Supreme Court held that it is a violation of the First Amendment to require public sector employees who are not members of a union to pay any union dues, even when a portion of those dues is attributable to the costs of collective bargaining on behalf
In a highly anticipated decision, the United States Supreme Court today held that it is a violation of the First Amendment to require public sector employees who are not members of a union to pay any union dues, even when a portion of those dues is attributable to the costs of collective bargaining on behalf of all employees. Janus v. AFSCME Council 31, 585
Alvarado v. Dart Container Corp. of Cal., 2018 WL 1146645 (Cal. S. Ct. 2018)
Hector Alvarado, who worked as a warehouse associate for Dart, is a member of a putative class of employees who, in addition to their normal hourly wages, received a $15 per day attendance bonus if they were scheduled to work on a Saturday or Sunday and did so, completing their
Artis v. District of Columbia, 583 U.S. ___, 138 S. Ct. 594 (2018)
Stephanie Artis filed a Title VII employment discrimination case against her employer, the District of Columbia, which was eventually dismissed on summary judgment by the district court; the district court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state-law claims that were included in the complaint. Artis then refiled her state
Mendoza v. Nordstrom, Inc., 2 Cal. 5th 1074 (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: