When Headless PAGAs Attack!
As we reported here, a split in authority has developed in the California Court of Appeal regarding what to do when an employer moves to compel arbitration of a Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) that is “headless”—that is, a claim seeking penalties on behalf of all allegedly aggrieved employees except the named plaintiff. (This is the latest trick the plaintiff’s bar has come up
The Headless PAGA Saga Continues
On February 26, 2025, in Parra Rodriguez v. Packers Sanitation, Inc., the California Court of Appeal (Fourth Appellate District) issued the latest published decision addressing the practice of filing so-called “headless” Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claims. In such cases, the plaintiff seeks civil penalties for all allegedly aggrieved employees except themself. In the wake of Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, 596
January 2025 California Employment Law Notes
California Updates Paid Sick Leave FAQs: What Employers Need to Know
The California Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) has released updated guidance clarifying how the state’s latest statutory enactments will impact employers’ paid sick leave obligations. Specifically, as we reported here, Assembly Bill (AB) 2499 and Senate Bill (SB) 1105 expand the permissible reasons for which employees can use paid sick leave.
The updated FAQs now explain that, in addition to existing uses of paid
November 2024 California Employment Law Notes
It’s Almost Valentine’s Day – And Love and Noncompetes Are In the Air!
As we previously reported, California recently enacted AB 1076, which reinforces the state’s broad statutory ban on noncompete agreements. The law took effect on January 1, 2024, and expressly codifies Edwards v. Arthur Andersen LLP, 44 Cal. 4th 937 (2008), a California Supreme Court opinion barring any noncompete, no matter how narrowly tailored it may be. The new law also affirms
Courts Are Overwhelmingly Staying Non-Individual Claims When Compelling Individual PAGA Claims to Arbitration
As we wrote previously, last summer’s blockbuster decision in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc., 14 Cal. 5th 1104 (2023) contained a notable silver lining. In ruling that a Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) plaintiff’s “non-individual” claims survive in court even after the “individual” claims are compelled to arbitration, the California Supreme Court strongly suggested that the non-individual claims should be stayed until the
Employers Owe No Duty Of Care To Prevent The Spread Of COVID To Employees’ Household Members
Kuciemba v. Victory Woodworks, Inc., 14 Cal. 5th 993 (2023); 74 F.4th 1039 (9th Cir. 2023)
The California Supreme Court unanimously ruled that employers are not liable to nonemployees who contract COVID-19 from employee household members who bring the virus home from their workplace, because “[a]n employer does not owe a duty of care under California law to prevent the spread of COVID-19 to
Principal Of Former Employer Liable Based On Alter Ego Theory
Hacker v. Fabe, 92 Cal. App. 5th 1267 (2023)
In 2005, attorney Jacqueline Fabe filed claim for unpaid wages against her employer with the Labor Commissioner. Her employer then filed a malpractice suit against Fabe, and Fabe in response filed a retaliation suit with the Labor Commissioner. Fabe and the Labor Commissioner later won on all claims. In March 2010, Fabe filed a motion