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”) … Continue Reading
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 … Continue Reading
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 … Continue Reading
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 … Continue Reading
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 … Continue Reading
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 … Continue Reading
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 … Continue Reading
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: A day of rest is guaranteed for each workweek. Periods of more than six consecutive days of work that stretch … Continue Reading
Laffitte v. Robert Half Int’l Inc., 1 Cal. 5th 480 (2016) An objecting class member in a wage and hour lawsuit challenged the trial court’s award of an attorney’s fee calculated as a percentage (one-third) of the overall settlement amount of $19 million. The objector asserted that pursuant to Serrano v. Priest, 20 Cal. 3d … Continue Reading
McLean v. State of Cal., 2016 WL 4395672 (Cal. S. Ct. 2016) Janis McLean, a retired deputy attorney general, filed suit against the State of California on behalf of herself and a class of former state employees who, having resigned or retired, did not receive their final wages within the time period set forth in … Continue Reading
Encino Motorcars, LLC v. Navarro, 579 U.S. ___, 2016 WL 3369424 (2016) An amendment to the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) exempts from its overtime requirements “any salesman, partsman, or mechanic primarily engaged in selling or servicing automobiles, trucks, or farm implements.” Later, the U.S. Department of Labor (“DOL”) issued an opinion letter and amended … Continue Reading
Green v. Brennan, 578 U.S. ___, 136 S. Ct. 1769 (2016) Marvin Green alleged racial discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, claiming he was denied a promotion because he is black; his supervisors had accused Green of the crime of intentionally delaying the mail. In an agreement between the parties dated December … Continue Reading
City of Petaluma v. Superior Court, 2016 WL 3342543 (Cal. Ct. App. 2016) Andrea Waters, who worked as a firefighter and paramedic for the City of Petaluma, alleged she was harassed and discriminated against based upon her sex. Waters also claimed she suffered retaliation after she complained about the treatment. Waters took a leave of … Continue Reading
Kilby v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc., 63 Cal. 4th 1 (2016) In this opinion, the California Supreme Court answered three questions posed to it by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit involving suitable seating requirements under California law. Section 14(A) of California Wage Order No. 7-2001 states that “All working employees shall … Continue Reading
Tyson Foods, Inc. v. Bouaphakeo, 577 U.S. ___, 136 S. Ct. 1036 (2016) Following a jury trial, the employees in this class/collective action recovered $2.9 million in compensatory damages for violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”). The employees alleged that they did not receive statutorily mandated overtime pay for the time they spent … Continue Reading
Please join Anthony Oncidi with Proskauer and David Weisenfeld with XpertHR for today’s webinar. JULY 8 @ 2pm ET This webinar will provide employers with expert guidance on how they are affected by the Supreme Court’s latest far-reaching rulings. As is so often the case, the Supreme Court is once again deciding controversial issues that … Continue Reading
Dep’t of Homeland Sec. v. MacLean, 574 U.S. ___, 135 S. Ct. 913 (2015) Robert J. MacLean became a federal air marshal for the TSA in 2001. In that role, MacLean was assigned to protect passenger flights from potential hijackings. In July 2003, the Department of Homeland Security issued a confidential advisory about a potential hijacking … 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
Over the past two weeks, the United States Supreme Court has repeatedly underscored the importance of having common questions that are susceptible to common answers in cases where plaintiffs are seeking class certification. Most recently, the Court clarified that this requirement, which has now been considered in both antitrust and employment cases, applies with respect … Continue Reading
Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church & School v. EEOC, 565 U.S. ___, 132 S. Ct. 680 (2012) Cheryl Perich was a “called” teacher for the church and also had the formal title of “Minister of Religion, Commissioned.” After Perich developed narcolepsy, the church replaced her with a lay teacher and eventually terminated her employment for “insubordination … Continue Reading
Schindler Elevator Corp. v. United States ex rel. Kirk, 563 U.S. ___, 131 S. Ct. 1885 (2011) Daniel Kirk, a former employee of Schindler Elevator Corporation, filed this lawsuit under the False Claims Act (“FCA”), alleging Schindler had submitted false or fraudulent claims for payment to the United States. Kirk alleged the company had falsely … Continue Reading
Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting, 563 U.S. ___, 131 S. Ct. 1968 (2011) In 1996, Congress created E-Verify, which is “an internet-based system that allows an employer to verify an employee’s work-authorization status.” In 2007, Arizona enacted the Legal Arizona Workers Act, which allows Arizona to suspend or revoke the licenses necessary to do business … Continue Reading
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 131 S. Ct. 2541 (2011) The United States Supreme Court held that this class of as many as 1.5 million current and former female Wal-Mart employees was improperly certified by the lower court. The three lead plaintiffs claimed they were discriminated against on the basis of their gender and that … Continue Reading
In Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, No. 10-277 (U.S. June 20, 2011), the Supreme Court vacated class certification of a gender discrimination lawsuit brought by 1.5 million current and former Wal-Mart employees because the plaintiffs failed to identify a specific, company-wide policy or practice of discrimination. Additionally, the Court held unanimously that the employees’ backpay claims … Continue Reading
This website uses third party cookies, over which we have no control. To deactivate the use of third party advertising cookies, you should alter the settings in your browser.
