California Employment Law Update

Tag Archives: UCL

March 2023 California Employment Law Notes

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: No Claim By Employee Who Was Friends With Alleged Harasser Pregnancy Discrimination Lawsuit Was Properly Dismissed Employer That Failed To Layoff Employee Before She Became … Continue Reading

Employee’s PAGA Action Was Not Limited By Sick Pay Statute

Wood v. Kaiser Found. Hosps., 88 Cal. App. 5th 742 (2023) Ana Wood brought a PAGA action against her employer Kaiser for alleged failure to correctly pay for three paid sick days as required under California’s Healthy Workplaces, Healthy Families Act (the “Act”). The Act provided for compensatory relief and civil penalties, but restricted relief … Continue Reading

Unfair Competition Claim Against Trucking Company is Not Preempted By Federal Law

People v. Pac Anchor Transp., Inc., 2014 WL 3702674 (Cal. S. Ct. 2014) The People on behalf of the State of California filed this unfair competition law (“UCL”) action against Pac Anchor Transportation, Inc., for misclassifying drivers as independent contractors and for other alleged violations of California labor and unemployment insurance laws.  In response, Pac … Continue Reading

Unfair Competition Claim Against Franchisor Was Properly Dismissed

Aleksick v. 7-Eleven, Inc., 205 Cal. App. 4th 1176 (2012) Kimberly Aleksick, who worked as a clerk at a 7-Eleven store, sued 7-Eleven (the franchisor of the store where Aleksick was employed) for violation of the Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”). Aleksick alleged that 7-Eleven, which provides payroll services to its franchisees, violated the UCL by … Continue Reading

PAGA Judgment Is Mostly Affirmed In Employee’s Favor

Thurman v. Bayshore Transit Mgmt., Inc., 203 Cal. App. 4th 1112 (2012) Leander Thurman sued Bayshore for alleged violations of the Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (“PAGA”) and the Unfair Competition Law and, following a bench trial, a judgment was entered imposing civil penalties, including unpaid wages, against Bayshore in the total amount of … Continue Reading

California Overtime Requirements Apply To Work Performed By Non-Resident Employees

Sullivan v. Oracle Corp., 662 F.3d 1265 (2011) Three Oracle instructors (all non-residents of California) filed this class action to recover allegedly unpaid overtime under California law for work they performed while in California. Two of the instructors were residents of Colorado and one was a resident of Arizona; all of them worked in their … Continue Reading

California Overtime Rules Apply To Out-of-State Residents Who Work In The State

Sullivan v. Oracle Corp., 51 Cal. 4th 1191 (2011) In this case, the California Supreme Court answered three questions certified to it by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit as follows: (1) California’s overtime law applies to work performed in California for a California employer by nonresident workers; (2) the Unfair … Continue Reading

Supreme Court Clarifies Liability on Waiting Time Penalties

On November 18, the California Supreme Court in Pineda v. Bank of America, No. S170758 (Cal. Nov. 18, 2010) (pdf) clarified two issues regarding so-called “waiting time penalties” (i.e., penalties under California Labor Code Section 203 associated with the late payment of final wages upon termination of employment). First, the Court ruled that a three-year statute … Continue Reading

Class Action Pleading Requirements Need Not Be Satisfied To Assert Private Attorneys General Act Claim

Arias v. Superior Court, 2009 WL 1838973 (Cal. S. Ct. 2009) Jose Arias sued his former employer, Angelo Dairy, for a number of alleged violations of the California Labor Code, including five claims that he asserted on behalf of himself as well as other current and former employees under the Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”). The … Continue Reading

Three Wage & Hour Questions Certified To The California Supreme Court

Sullivan v. Oracle Corp., 557 F.3d 979 (9th Cir. 2009) The Ninth Circuit has withdrawn its published opinion in this case and certified the following questions to the California Supreme Court: (1) Does the California Labor Code apply to overtime work performed in California for a California-based employer by out-of-state plaintiffs in the circumstances of … Continue Reading

Employee May Not Recover Penalties As Restitution Under Unfair Competition Law

Pineda v. Bank of Am., N.A., 170 Cal. App. 4th 388 (2009) Jorge Pineda filed this class action against Bank of America for unpaid wages and for “waiting-time” penalties under Labor Code § 203. Although Pineda gave the bank two weeks’ advance notice of his resignation, the bank failed to pay him his final pay … Continue Reading

California Overtime Requirements Apply To Work Performed By Non- Resident Employees

Sullivan v. Oracle Corp., 547 F.3d 1177 (9th Cir. 2008) Three Oracle instructors (all non-residents of California) filed this class action to recover allegedly unpaid overtime under California law for work they performed while in California. Two of the instructors were residents of Colorado and one was a resident of Arizona; all of them worked … Continue Reading

Administrative Employee’s Overtime And Meal Period Claims Were Properly Dismissed

Combs v. Skyriver Communications, Inc., 159 Cal. App. 4th 1242 (2008) Mark Combs sued his former employer, Skyriver Communications, and Skyriver’s former interim CEO, Massih Tayebi, for violations of the California Labor Code, the Unfair Competition Law and the Private Attorneys General Act of 2004. Combs, who was employed as the manager of capacity planning … Continue Reading

Summary Judgment Granted In Meal/Rest Period Case

White v. Starbucks Corp., 497 F. Supp. 2d 1080 (N.D. Cal. 2007) (Walker, J.) Steve White, a former store manager for Starbucks, claimed the company had failed to (1) pay overtime wages in violation of Labor Code §§ 201 and 204 and Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 11070(12)(A); (2) provide meal and rest periods in … 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