We invite you to review our newly-posted March 2023 California Employment Law Notes, a comprehensive review of the latest and most significant developments in California employment law. The highlights include:

Naranjo v. Spectrum Sec. Servs., Inc., 2023 WL 2261253 (Cal. Ct. App. 2023)

After holding that premium payments from meal and rest period violations under Labor Code section 226.7 constituted “wages,” the California Supreme Court remanded to the Court of Appeal to resolve two questions: First, whether in failing to timely pay employees premium pay, the trial court erred in finding the employer had

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:

Naranjo v. Spectrum Sec. Servs., Inc., 13 Cal. 5th 93 (2022)

Gustavo Naranjo alleged that his employer had not provided an additional hour of pay for each day on which Spectrum failed to provide employees with a legally compliant meal break (i.e., had failed to provide “premium pay” pursuant to Cal. Lab. Code § 226.7). Naranjo further alleged that Spectrum was required to report

Jackpot Harvesting Co. v. Superior Court, 26 Cal. App. 5th 125 (2018)

Labor Code Section 226.2, which became effective Jan. 1, 2016, addresses the manner in which piece-rate employees are to be compensated for rest and recovery periods and other non-productive time on the job (“rest/NP time”).  The Court of Appeal held that an employer complying with the statute’s “safe harbor” provision by

Canales v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 23 Cal. App. 5th 1262 (2018)

Fabio Canales and Andy Cortes sued Wells Fargo under PAGA for an alleged violation of Cal. Lab. Code § 226 for failure to provide an itemized wage statement concurrently with a terminated employee’s final wages paid in-store. The trial court granted summary judgment to Wells Fargo on the ground that it

Raines v. Coastal Pac. Food Distrib., Inc., 23 Cal. App. 5th 667 (2018)

Terri Raines sued Coastal Pacific individually and under the Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) for failure to furnish her and other employees accurate itemized wage statements showing the applicable hourly rates in effect during the pay period and the corresponding number of hours worked at each hourly rate as required

Heritage Residential Care, Inc. v. Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, 192 Cal. App. 4th 75 (2011)

Heritage Residential, a company that operates seven residential care facilities, employed 24 workers, 16 of whom lacked social security numbers. Heritage treated the 16 employees who did not have social security numbers as independent contractors and issued them 1099 statements rather than itemized wage statements. Following a workplace