California Employment Law Update

Tag Archives: employment application

November 2022 California Employment Law Notes

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: Equal Pay Act Claim Should Not Have Been Dismissed Whistleblower Claim Should Not Have Been Dismissed In Part School District Employee May Have Been Discriminated … Continue Reading

School District Employee May Have Been Discriminated Against On The Basis Of A Disability

Price v. Victor Valley Union High Sch. Dist., 2022 WL 16845113 (Cal. Ct. App. 2022) La Vonya Price worked as a part-time substitute special education aide at the Victor Valley Unified School District before applying for a full-time position.  Although she received an offer for a full-time position, it was contingent upon her passing a … Continue Reading

July 2022 California Employment Law Notes

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: Summary Judgment Was Properly Granted To Employer In Whistleblower Case Job Applicants Need Not Be Paid For Time/Expenses Associated With Drug Testing Employer May Have … Continue Reading

Employer May Have Willfully Violated FCRA By Not Providing Employees Proper Background Check Notice

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 … Continue Reading

Job Applicants Need Not Be Paid For Time/Expenses Associated With Drug Testing

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, … Continue Reading

UPS May Not Have Violated The ADA By Excluding Deaf Drivers Who Failed To Satisfy DOT Hearing Standard

Bates v. United Parcel Serv., 511 F.3d 974 (9th Cir. 2007) (en banc) One of the requirements applied by UPS to those applicants seeking to drive the familiar brown “package cars” was that they pass the physical examination (including a hearing exam) that the DOT requires of drivers of commercial vehicles of a gross vehicle weight … Continue Reading
LexBlog

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.

OK