Once again, RPNA is challenging Zurich Insurance Company for subjecting employers to out-of-state arbitrations, over collateralization, and overpayment for coverage due to poor claims handling. In this new case, Zurich increased its collateral requirement more than seven-fold for Pacific States Industries’ (PSI) large deductible workers’ comp program after learning the company was moving its program…Details
RPNA Partner Nick Roxborough—who has been leading the fight against the Division of Workers’ Compensation’s (DWC) underground regulations—will be moderating a panel at the CWC & Risk Conference on Friday, September 7, 2018.
The Court’s answer remains unclear and the potential impact to California Employers can be enormous. As you are certainly aware by now, last Spring the California Supreme Court issued its decision in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court, which community leaders view as a sea change for California business. No one who does business with independent contractors…Details
California employment laws are among the toughest in the nation and the number of lawsuits filed by disgruntled employees among the highest as well. It is also probably not surprising that legal claims surrounding pay seem to come up most often.
While the status of independent contractors versus employees seems to be in a constant state of flux in California, one thing is certain: fewer and fewer workers actually qualify for IC status. Indeed, in a ruling that could once again change the status of workers across the state, the California Supreme Court recently made it…Details
School’s out for summer… And that means many employees are requesting time off for family vacations, making now a great time for your business to review its vacation policy. Vacation policies must be compliant with California law and also meet company needs. While paid vacation is not mandatory in California, if an employer has offered…Details
The California Supreme Court recently ruled that employers must pay their workers for small amounts of time they spend on routine work tasks off the clock. In the case Troester v. Starbucks Corp., the Court rejected the notion that the “de minimis” doctrine commonly applied by federal courts would automatically or routinely excuse the payment…Details
Retailer challenges Consumer Advocacy Group on statute of limitations and lack of evidence. In the closely watched case of Consumer Advocacy Group, Inc. v. National Stores, Inc., the Los Angeles Superior Court last week entered a judgment against Consumer Advocacy Group (CAG), stating it failed to meet its burden of proof, violated the one-year statute…Details
Most businesses—of all sizes—have employee handbooks. The handbook is a policy manual that serves as the governing document for the business’s workplace and human resources operations. The handbook not only provides the “playbook” for expectations about workplace practices and culture, but it can also serve as valuable evidence in a lawsuit. An employer should draft…Details
The United States Supreme Court has ruled in a 5-4 decision that employers have a right to require employees resolve claims against employers individually, rather than on a class-action basis. Workers routinely sign arbitration agreements in their hiring paperwork, and before the decision in Epic Systems v. Lewis, there was a conflict in the law…Details