The federal Department of Labor (DOL) recently announced a four-factor test for determining joint employer liability in various employment scenarios under the Fair Labor and Standards Act (FLSA). This is the first major revision to the FLSA about joint employer determinations since it was promulgated in 1958. In addition, the Dynamex decision and AB5 have thrown…Details
In California, few industries are as heavily regulated as is the insurance industry. California has perhaps the strongest insurance laws in the nation designed to protect its policyholders, including regulations to ensure that carriers have sufficient resources to pay claims, to control the manner in which premiums are calculated, and to regulate specific language within…Details
The California legislature has been busy. There are numerous new and significant employment laws effective January 1, 2020. Employers should take note of the following key developments and should review their policies and practices—preferably with counsel—to ensure they are in compliance so as to limit any potential exposure. Minimum Wage and Minimum Salary Basis Increase (Labor…Details
There is potentially some more bad news for California employers affected by the recent wave of “independent contractor” decisions. The California Court of Appeal recently held that the ABC test as outlined in the 2018 California Supreme Court Dynamex decision applies retroactively to pending litigation on wage and hour cases. The opinion in Gonzales v.…Details
The Court of Appeal concluded that many of the disputed wage and hour claims in an underlying lawsuit are potentially subject to coverage under an employment practices liability insurance (“EPLI”) policy despite a wage and hour exclusion. Southern California Pizza Company, LLC (“SCPC”) was named as a defendant in a putative class action lawsuit alleging…Details
1. “Call-In” Shifts Trigger Reporting Time Wages On February 4, 2019, a divided panel of the California Court of Appeal, in Ward v. Tilly’s Inc., held that certain on call scheduling triggered the Wage Order’s reporting time pay requirements, effectively putting an end to a common scheduling practice in California. In this case, employees of Tilly’s,…Details
In the recent case of NEW PRIME INC. v. OLIVEIRA, the United States Supreme Court carved out an important exception to the rule that arbitration agreements are typically enforceable to prevent employees from bringing actions in court, when it ruled unanimously that workers engaged in interstate commerce can avoid arbitration agreements and have their grievances…Details
New California law requires that all employers of five or more employees must provide one hour of sexual harassment and abusive conduct prevention training to non-managerial employees and two hours of sexual harassment and abusive conduct prevention training to managerial employees once every two years. Prior law only required training of supervisory employees. Under the…Details
As many business owners are aware, the California Supreme Court recently threw employers a serious curveball with respect to how employers must calculate overtime. Adding to the confusion, the Court stated employers should have been aware of this calculation method even though the same California Supreme Court declared it void over 20 years ago.
The EEOC shows no signs of slowing down when it comes to its strategic enforcement of federal workplace discrimination laws. Indeed, EEOC litigation picked up in the fiscal year ended September 30, 2018, and the agency just held a major public hearing in October to emphasize the attention its placing on workplace harassment.