Labor & Employment

Silver, a Hollywood executive, took his chef and an executive assistant, Musgrove, with his family for their vacation on Bora Bora.  The chef met Musgrove after hours and gave her alcohol and cocaine, after which she went swimming and drowned.  This decision holds that Silver is not vicariously liable for the chef's after hours activities with Musgrove under any of… Read More

Following EEOC v. Waffle House Inc. (2002) 122 S.Ct. 754, this decision holds that the DFEH cannot be compelled to arbitrate even though the employees, whom it alleges were illegally discriminated against, all signed arbitration agreements. Read More

A plaintiff may apply to the court for leave to proceed by a fictitious name if privacy concerns outweigh the First Amendment interest in public access to judicial proceedings.  Here, the employee on whose behalf DFEH sued for employment discrimination said that revealing his identity and caste would subject him and his family to discrimination and jeopardize their safety in… Read More

Under IWC Wage Order no. 7, an employer must "provide" a seat to covered clerical employees, unless work requirements preclude work while seated.  This decision holds that except for the most obvious cases (such as where the employer has a seat at work station) whether the employer has "provided" a seat raises a question of fact that precludes summary judgment… Read More

The district court erred in certifying a plaintiff class in this case challenging defendant's classification of its property preservation workers as independent contractors and asserting claims for overtime pay and expense reimbursement.  Plaintiffs could not prove fact of damage--not just amount of damage--by common evidence since some class members had not worked overtime or incurred reimbursable business expenses.  The district… Read More

This decision rejects plaintiff's argument that the PAGA statute violates the state constitution's separation of powers clause because it supposedly allows private citizens to seek civil penalties on the state’s behalf without the executive branch exercising sufficient prosecutorial discretion.  The contention is barred by Iskanian v. CLS Transportation Los Angeles, LLC (2014) 59 Cal.4th 348, 360 which held that “PAGA… Read More

Plaintiff was a nurse, employed by a staffing company, on temporary assignment to a hospital run by defendant.  Plaintiff brought separate class actions against the staffing company and the hospital for wage and hour violations.  This decision holds that the settlement and dismissal of plaintiff's suit against the staffing company did not end or preclude her suit against the defendant. … Read More

An employee who complains to the DLSE and seeks relief from the Labor Commissioner in a Berman hearing is entitled to back wages for the limitations period calculated backwards from the date the employee files an initial report or claim with the DLSE, not from the later date of filing a formal complaint.  Though it doesn't say so expressly, Lab.… Read More

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration's 12/28/2018 order stating that California's meal and rest break statutes were "no longer" enforceable as to interstate truckers of goods preempted state law only prospectively and did not eliminate claims for missed meal and rest breaks that occurred before the order was issued. Read More

Agreeing with Magadia v. Wal-Mart Associates, Inc. (9th Cir. 2021) 999 F.3d 668, this decision holds that the employer did not violate Lab. Code 226(a)(9) by not stating a wage rate or hours worked for a true-up of overtime pay for the preceding month's work based on the flat rate bonus paid that month.  The statute requires wage statements to… Read More

The FAA does not preempt California law insofar as it invalidates a waiver of an employee's right to bring PAGA claims arising out of Labor Code violations that affected the plaintiff employee.  However, the FAA does preempt California law (Iskanian v. CLS Transportation Los Angeles, LLC (2014) 59 Cal.4th 348 and progeny) insofar as it precludes waiver of the employee's… Read More

This decision holds that an employer did not have to pay job applicants for the time and expense of taking drug tests as a precondition for employment.  The employer's control over the drug tests was not control over the performance of work and so didn't make the applicants employees.  Nor was the drug test a condition subsequent to employment.  Instead,… Read More

This decision affirms a summary judgment for Walmart on a model's claim for waiting time penalties for Walmart's failure to pay her all earned wages after each one- or two-day photo shoot.  Although triable issues of fact remained as to whether plaintiff was an employee to whom Labor Code 203 applied, Walmart had established its defense of a good faith… Read More

An airline employee whose duties involved loading and unloading baggage and cargo onto and from airplanes that flew interstate routes was an employee engaged in interstate commerce and thus the FAA did not apply to the arbitration clause in his employment agreement.  9 USC 1 exempts a class of workers--not a class of their employers; so the fact that Southwest… Read More

Following Lawson v. PPG Architectural Finishes, Inc. (2022) 12 Cal.5th 703, this decision pays close attention to the text of Lab. Code 1102.5, but nevertheless affirms a summary judgment for the employer.  First, the decision casts doubt on whether the employee who invokes section 1102.5 must actually believe what she reported was a violation of law so long as there… Read More

The extra hour's penalty pay that an employer must pay a worker who has been denied a meal break is wages, and so failure to pay the hour's wage triggers the additional waiting time and insufficient wage statement penalties under Lab. Code 203 and 226.  The employee is entitled to 7% prejudgment interest on the hour's penalty wages. Read More

CCP 340.3(a) lengthens the statute of limitations for suing a defendant convicted of a felony for the wrongful act on which the plaintiff sues.  This decision holds that section 340.3(a) does not lengthen the statute of limitations for suits against those vicariously liable for the felon's wrongful act, such as his employer in this case.  The decision also holds that… Read More

This decision reverses a summary judgment for defendant, finding a triable issue of fact as to whether defendant willfully violated the FCRA's requirement that an employer provide a job applicant a stand alone disclosure of its potential use of credit reports for employment screening.  (15 USC 1681b(b)(2)(A).)  Wilful for this purpose includes reckless conduct that increases the risk of violation… Read More

While an easily correctible defect is not a disability protected under the Americans with Disabilities Act, a disability need not be permanent or long-term to be protected.  Here, the employee adequately alleged an ADA claim against her former employer by pleading facts plausibly establishing that she had a physical impairment both during an immediate post-surgical period after a bone biopsy… Read More

One union representing some of Antioch's employees brought an administrative grievance making the same claim as the retired employee plaintiff brought in this later suit--that the City was stinting them on contributions for their benefit to CalPers,  This decision holds that the due process limits on collateral estoppel keep it from operating to bar the current suit based on the… Read More