Labor & Employment

Automotive service advisors (i.e. those who sell automobile servicing) are exempt from the Fair Labor Standards Act’s overtime payment requirements. Read More

An employer may not defend an Equal Pay Act claim by showing that pay disparities are based on differences in the workers’ wages at prior jobs. Read More

A narrower state law does not preempt San Francisco’s ordinance more broadly prohibiting landlords from discriminating against prospective tenants based on their receiving government assistance to pay rent. Read More

A county counsel is employed pursuant to statute, not contract, so he could not sue the county for a supposed breach of his employment contract. Read More

Plaintiff, a temp hired by defendant staff agency to work for another company, was considered to have joint employers, both of whom owed a duty to allow her meal breaks; however, each employer was liable only for its own actions that violate that legal requirement. Read More

In computing overtime pay at 150% of regular pay, the hourly equivalent of a flat sum bonus is calculated by dividing the bonus should by the number of non-overtime hours the employee worked during the pay period. Read More

Agency records containing personal information are protected under the Information Privacy Act even if not maintained in the agency’s centralized personnel records. Read More

To be protected as a whistleblower under the Dodd-Frank Act, an employee must report the information to the Securities and Exchange Commission. Read More

A government employee must pursue the employer’s administrative remedies before filing a civil action; Labor Code section 244 only allows the employee to forego remedies before the Labor Commissioner. Read More

The federal Occupational Safety and Health Act (“OSH Act”) does not preempt California law to the extent it allows a district attorney to bring an Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”) action based on the defendant's unlawful practice of failing to meet CalOSHA workplace safety standards even though the state plan did not provide for enforcement by that means. Read More

California minimum wage and overtime pay laws are not inconsistent with the Fair Labor Standards Act and so apply to workers on oil rigs on the outer continental shelf off the California coast. Read More

The wage statement required by Labor Code section 226 need not separately list the hours worked and the hourly rate at which the employer makes contributions to an employer-union benefit trust based on the employee’s work. Read More

In a suit for discrimination under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, district courts have the discretion to “gross up” an award for back pay to account for income-tax consequences. Read More

In a wrongful termination suit, a plaintiff-employee cannot defeat an employer’s summary judgment motion by arguing that the employer’s pre-termination investigation could have been better or more comprehensive. Read More

An employer’s arbitration clause was denied enforcement as procedurally and substantively unconscionable because it was presented on a take-it-or-leave-it basis and unduly limited both formal and informal discovery. Read More

Under the Labor Management Relations Act, a worker’s claim must be arbitrated if its resolution requires interpretation of the governing collective bargaining agreement; as here, where the worker’s waiting time penalty claim depended on whether his employment as a security guard was episodic or continuous. Read More

Under Labor Code 3744, the California Self-Insurers’ Security Fund may sue in court (not before the Workers Compensation Appeals Board) and recover workers compensation benefits paid on behalf of an insolvent self-insured temporary staffing agency from the agency’s customers who were the injured workers’ special employers. Read More

For purposes of the Labor Code's wage and hour protections for employees, taxi drivers are considered employees, since their employer can fire them for misconduct. Read More

Civil penalties may be recovered under the Private Attorney General Act without proving that the defendant employer’s failure to provide workers accurate, itemized pay statements was knowing and intentional. Read More

Plaintiff could not state a viable employment discrimination claim based on her supervisor’s actions favoring his co-employee wife, but plaintiff could state a viable whistleblower claim based on the supervisor’s retaliation for her complaining about his favoritism. Read More