On January 15, 2025, the United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in E.M.D. Sales, Inc. v. Carrera, holding that the “preponderance of the evidence” is the applicable standard courts must use to analyze whether an exemption is proper under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). In practical terms, this means employers must
What Would a 32-Hour Workweek Look Like?
A few weeks ago, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders announced a bill to implement a 32-hour workweek. While such a law is a long way from becoming a reality, it does raise interesting questions concerning exactly what a 32-hour workweek would look like, especially in California.
Before engaging in this thought experiment one thing should be
California Supreme Court Sweeps PAGA Manageability Under the Rug in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills
On January 18, 2024, the California Supreme Court issued its long-awaited opinion in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills to decide the question of whether California trial courts have inherent authority to strike claims brought under California’s Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) on the grounds that the claims were not manageable. The Court ultimately upheld the appellate court’s holding, which we previously discussed in detail here, finding that trial courts do not have such inherent authority.Continue Reading California Supreme Court Sweeps PAGA Manageability Under the Rug in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills
Driving the Narrative: California Supreme Court’s Adolph v. Uber Technologies Decision Shifts Gears, Challenging U.S. Supreme Court’s Viking River Cruises v. Moriana Holding
Introduction
With its decision in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. (“Adolph”) the California Supreme Court has reignited the debate surrounding arbitration agreements containing waivers of an employee’s right to bring a representative action under California’s Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”). This ruling, which challenges the earlier decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana (“Viking River Cruises”), marks a significant shift back in favor of employees and their ability to pursue PAGA claims notwithstanding the existence of a written waiver. Continue Reading Driving the Narrative: California Supreme Court’s Adolph v. Uber Technologies Decision Shifts Gears, Challenging U.S. Supreme Court’s Viking River Cruises v. Moriana Holding
AB 2188 Leaves California Employers’ Policies on Marijuana Use up in Smoke
On September 18, 2022, Governor Gavin Newsom signed AB 2188 into law, which prohibits employers from taking any adverse employment action against an employee in conjunction with an employee’s off-duty marijuana use.
AB 2188 makes it unlawful for employers to “discriminate against a person in hiring, termination, or any term or condition of employment” for
California Supreme Court Extends Employees’ Rights to Waiting-Time Penalties and Other Damages
On May 23, 2022, the California Supreme Court issued its highly anticipated ruling in Naranjo v. Spectrum Security Services and decided two critical questions: first, whether an employee is entitled to “waiting time penalties” for unpaid premium pay, and second, whether employers are required to report premium pay on their employees’ wage statements.
As all
California Court of Appeal Removes Another Arrow from The Quiver of Employers
On March 23, 2022, in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc., the California Court of Appeal for the Fourth District created a split in authority when they held that wage-and-hour lawsuits brought under California’s Private Attorneys General Act cannot be dismissed on manageability grounds. This decision directly contradicted the holding in Wesson v. Staples the
California Provides Employees with Another Bucket of COVID-19 Supplemental Paid Leave
California Provides Employees with Another Bucket of COVID-19 Supplemental Paid Leave
On February 9, 2022, California Governor Gavin Newsom approved Senate Bill 114 (“SB 114”), which entitles most California employees to a new bucket of COVID-19 supplemental paid sick leave. The law will go into effect on February 19, 2022.
California’s prior law entitling workers
California Supreme Court Provides Clarity on Which Standard to Use for Retaliation Cases
On January 27, 2022, the California Supreme Court in Lawson v. PPG Architectural Finishes, Inc., No. S266001, 2022 WL 244731 (Cal. Jan. 27, 2022), addressed the issue of which standard courts must use when analyzing retaliation claims brought under California Labor Code section 1102.5.
In requesting that the California Supreme Court answer this question