Vazquez v. SaniSure, Inc., 101 Cal. App. 5th 139 (2024)

Jasmine Vazquez began working at a pharmaceutical company through a staffing agency and was later hired by the company as an at-will employee.  At the time of initial hire, Vazquez agreed that claims she had against the company would be submitted to and determined exclusively by binding arbitration and that she would bring any

Huerta v. CSI Elec. Contractors, 15 Cal. 5th 908 (2024)

This decision arose from a class action asserting wage claims on behalf of contractors hired to assist with “procurement, installation, construction, and testing services” at a solar power facility on privately-owned land.  The California Supreme Court answered three questions certified by the Ninth Circuit as follows:

  • An employee’s time spent on an employer’s premises

As the economy continues to struggle amidst the ravages of 40-year-high inflation, employers are finding it increasingly difficult to maintain their current staffing levels.

While the tech industry has been the epicenter for layoffs thus far, a growing number of industries are being affected as well, including banking, financial, and legal services, and media outlets.

The trend for mass job cuts appears to be accelerating.

We invite you to review our newly-posted November 2022 California Employment Law Notes, a comprehensive review of the latest and most significant developments in California employment law. The highlights include:

Limon v. Circle K Stores Inc., 2022 WL 14391789 (Cal. Ct. App. 2022)

Plaintiff Ernesto Limon was employed by Circle K (which operates gas stations and convenience stores in California) for just one month before filing this putative class action lawsuit against his former employer, alleging violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA).  Limon alleged that Circle K’s standard form in which it

We invite you to review our newly-posted July 2022 California Employment Law Notes, a comprehensive review of the latest and most significant developments in California employment law. The highlights include:

Hebert v. Barnes & Noble, Inc., 78 Cal. App. 5th 791 (2022)

The federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”) requires an employer to provide a job applicant with a standalone disclosure stating that the employer may obtain the applicant’s consumer report when making a hiring decision. In this putative class action, Vicki Hebert alleged that Barnes & Noble willfully violated the FCRA by providing

Johnson v. WinCo Foods, LLC, 2022 WL 2112792 (9th Cir. 2022)

Alfred Johnson brought this class action against WinCo, seeking compensation as an “employee” for the time and expense of taking a drug test as a successful applicant for employment. Plaintiffs argued that because the drug tests were administered under the control of the employer, they qualified as “employees” under California law. The district

We invite you to review our newly-posted May 2022 California Employment Law Notes, a comprehensive review of the latest and most significant developments in California employment law. The highlights include: