In Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc., No. S274340, 2024 WL 188863 (Cal. Jan. 18, 2024), the Supreme Court of California resolved a split among the Courts of Appeal regarding whether trial courts possess inherent authority to dismiss California Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) claims based on their lack of manageability and held … Continue Reading
Virtually every employer in California has repeated the mantra of “no off-the-clock work” to its employees. But what about those minutes that are “on-the-clock” but remain unpaid because of rounding practices? Since 2012, when the California appellate court decided See’s Candy Shops, Inc. v. Superior Court, 210 Cal. App. 4th 889 (2012), employers have presumed … Continue Reading
Last Wednesday, the U.S. Supreme Court waded into the complicated and controversial waters of California’s Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”). At issue was whether pre-dispute arbitration agreements between employers and employees could be enforced to compel PAGA claims into arbitration – California courts had said no. At stake is a huge loophole which … Continue Reading
If you’ve been following our blog, you already know that the topic of employer-mandated arbitration agreements has been a hot issue in recent years for government agencies and in the state and federal courts. Most notably, in May of last year, the United States Supreme Court issued its highly-anticipated decision in Epic Systems v. Lewis, … Continue Reading
The Court’s ruling in Lamps Plus, Inc., et al. v. Varela is the latest in the Court’s ongoing pro-employer, pro-arbitration jurisprudence As we first reported here, the United States Supreme Court’s docket this term includes three significant cases interpreting various aspects of the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”). Earlier this year, the Court ruled in the … Continue Reading
On January 15, 2019, the United States Supreme Court held in New Prime Inc. v. Oliveira that a trucking company could not compel its drivers, which it classified as independent contractors, to arbitrate their wage and hour claims against the company because Congress intended to exempt all interstate transportation workers from the Federal Arbitration Act … Continue Reading
Earlier this year, the United States Supreme Court held in Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis that employers can require employees to agree to arbitrate disputes between them solely on an individual basis and to waive class and collective action litigation procedures without running afoul of federal law. (See our post here). Addressing an issue not … Continue Reading
We’ve been keeping you apprised of the many developments over the past few years coming from the United States Supreme Court and other courts concerning agreements between employers and their employees to arbitrate disputes arising out of the employment relationship. The Supreme Court’s decision last term in Epic Systems v. Lewis, which we discussed in … Continue Reading
On July 26, 2018, the California Supreme Court ruled in Troester v. Starbucks Corporation that the federal de minimis doctrine does not apply to a California employee’s class action wage claims. This ruling will have widespread impact, particularly on those employers with large numbers of non-exempt employees such as retailers and food service providers, as … Continue Reading
In 1974, the U.S. Supreme Court decided in American Pipe & Construction Co. v. Utah, 414 U.S. 538, that the timely filing of a class action complaint tolls the applicable statute of limitations for all persons encompassed by that complaint. The impact of that ruling was that potential class members did not have to intervene … Continue Reading
For the past six years, employers have challenged the National Labor Relations Board’s (“NLRB”) position that the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”) prohibits employers from requiring employees to forego class and collective action and instead individually litigate their employment-related claims. (Our prior coverage on this issue has been extensive – see here.) After a long … Continue Reading
As we blogged earlier this year, in March 2018, the United States Department of Labor (DOL) announced a new program, referred to as PAID (or, Payroll Audit Independent Determination), under which employers may voluntarily apply for DOL assistance in resolving potential claims for wage underpayment under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). As previously … Continue Reading
Illinois enacted its Biometric Information Privacy Act (“BIPA”) in 2008 to regulate, among other things, employer collection and use of employee biometric information. Biometrics is defined as the measurement and analysis of physical and behavioral characteristics. This analysis produces biometric identifiers that include things like fingerprints, iris or face scans, and voiceprints, all of which … Continue Reading
Yesterday marked the first day of the United States Supreme Court’s new term, and the first case heard (Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis) was one of interest to employers around the country. In several cases consolidated before the Court on appeal, the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) found employer arbitration agreements that included waivers of … Continue Reading
In early August, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued two decisions regarding class and collective action waivers. Like its earlier decisions in D.R. Horton, Inc. and Murphy Oil USA, Inc., both decisions supported employers’ use of waivers to eliminate group lawsuits against them in employment cases. The two new cases, … Continue Reading
Court joins Seventh and Ninth Circuits in holding that employer’s requiring employees to waive class and collective action procedures as a condition of employment is unenforceable, but issue will be resolved late this year by United States Supreme Court The issue of whether an employer can require, as a condition of employment, that an employee … Continue Reading
A federal appeals court ruling in a case coming out of Maine involving overtime pay and dairy delivery drivers didn’t come down to trucks, milk, or money. Instead, it revolved around one of the biggest debates in the “grammar nerd” world – the “Oxford comma.” Do you remember the Oxford comma from your grammar school days? … Continue Reading
As followers of our blog know, we have been closely watching developments over the past few years involving the tension between the National Labor Relations Board and the courts concerning whether arbitration agreements that require employees to resolve most employment-related disputes in individual arbitration proceedings, and bar the use of class or collective action … Continue Reading
We have been closely monitoring the battle over the legality of class and collective action waivers under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has been steadfast in its position that such waivers run afoul of the NLRA. The Fifth Circuit was the first Circuit Court to weigh in, consistently … Continue Reading
Ninth Circuit joins Seventh Circuit in holding that class and collective action waivers in arbitration agreements violate the National Labor Relations Act and therefore are unenforceable. The question is straightforward enough: does an employer violate the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) by requiring that employees sign an agreement to arbitrate any claims concerning their wages, … Continue Reading
In a 35 page Order [PDF] issued on Thursday, August 18, Judge Edward M. Chen dealt a surprising blow in O’Connor v. Uber Technologies, Inc.: he denied preliminary approval for a $100 million settlement. In no uncertain terms, Judge Chen said the current terms of the settlement are “not fair, adequate, and reasonable.” In the … Continue Reading
The court is the first federal appellate court to accept the NLRB’s position on the issue The long-running teeter-totter battle between National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or Board) and employers regarding the lawfulness of class and collective action waivers in employment arbitration agreements continues. Joining the fray this week is the U.S. Court of Appeals … Continue Reading
After years of contentious litigation, Uber Technologies Inc. has decided not to leave its fate in the hands of jurors. Instead, Uber announced on Thursday that two of the most closely watched class actions against it had settled…for $100 million. In addition to the hefty price tag, Uber made a number of concessions including: Uber … Continue Reading
Since it was launched back in 2009, Uber Technologies, Inc. has been in the national spotlight for developing and implementing its revolutionary “ridesharing” mobile application. Uber continues to appear in headlines for a multitude of reasons, many of which are desirable, and at least one of which is not: getting sued by its workforce. Despite … Continue Reading