The California Supreme Court has issued its opinion in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc. (S274340, Jan. 18, 2024), resolving a split of authority regarding whether claims brought under the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) may be stricken where there is no manageable way to try them. Unfortunately for California employers, the answer is no. This outcome is disappointing to those hoping that the Supreme Court might have done something more in Estrada to curb the abuse of PAGA, which too often becomes a vehicle through which overreaching, unmanageable claims are...

The American workplace has changed significantly since the passage of the Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”) over 25 years ago. The ubiquitous use of technology, such as email, instant messaging applications, laptops, and cellphones, have made working from home more commonplace and blurred the lines between home and work life. In some industries or work cultures, managers expect employees to be accessible at most hours of the day, even when taking approved leaves of absence. The need for employees to respond to employer inquiries while out of the office is even more likely when...

With California’s new pay transparency and pay reporting obligations under S.B. 1162 now in effect, employers are seeking answers on various open questions for complying with the new law. As we previously reported, S.B. 1162 requires employers with 15 or more employees to include pay scale information in each job posting for positions in California, as well as disclose information to current California employees upon request. Failure to...

On July 17, the California Supreme Court issued its opinion in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. (S274671, Cal. Jul. 2023), holding that an employee who has been compelled to arbitrate claims under the Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (PAGA, Cal. Lab. Code § 2698, et seq.) that are “premised on Labor Code violations actually sustained by the [employee] maintains statutory standing to pursue ‘PAGA claims arising out of events involving other employees’ in court.”

The Viking River Decision

The California Supreme Court’s...

A split panel of the Ninth Circuit vacated in part a preliminary injunction barring enforcement of AB 51, the California law banning mandatory employment arbitration agreements.[1] But the Ninth Circuit found that the penalties for violation of this provision are preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), so the enforcement path remains unclear.

How’d We Get Here?

AB 51 adds California Labor Code section 432.6, which bars employers from...

On August 20, 2024, a judge in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas granted a nationwide injunction against the Federal Trade Commission’s (“FTC’s”) rule banning non-competes with employees (the “Rule”). As we previously reported, the court foreshadowed this ruling last month when it issued a limited injunction,...

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana, 142 S. Ct. 1906 (2022), in June 2022 delivered a victory for California employers facing claims brought pursuant to the Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (PAGA), as we previously reported. Since then, the California state and federal courts have seen an influx of motions to compel arbitration of individual PAGA claims and to dismiss (or in the alternative stay) the non-individual PAGA...

On April 15, 2024, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the EEOC) published its final Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) regulation requiring covered employers to provide qualifying employees and applicants accommodations to perform their work duties safely and without retaliation. This alert covers key provisions of the final rule.

Effective June 18, 2024, under the PWFA and the EEOC’s regulations:

• In addition to current anti-discrimination laws protecting pregnant employees, covered employers will be required to affirmatively make reasonable...

While the FTC was relatively quiet in 2023 on the non-compete front, California forged ahead with two amendments to its non-compete statute (Business and Professions Code section 16600) that, depending on how courts interpret them, could be one of the most significant developments in the California employee-mobility space in the last 10 years. One of the amendments (SB 699) extends California’s non-compete ban to those signed by out-of-state employees under out-of-state law and creates a private right of action. The other (AB 1076) makes it “unlawful” to enter into a non-compete with an...

The California Supreme Court has issued its opinion in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc. (S274340, Jan. 18, 2024), resolving a split of authority regarding whether claims brought under the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) may be stricken where there is no manageable way to try them. Unfortunately for California employers, the answer is no. This outcome is disappointing to those hoping that the Supreme Court might have done something more in Estrada to curb the abuse of PAGA, which too often becomes a vehicle through which overreaching, unmanageable claims are...

Each year seems to bring significant developments in whistleblower law, and 2023 has been no exception. As whistleblower activity increases, so, too, has the scope of its protections. From state to federal government, from the SEC to the U.S. Supreme Court, courts and regulators in the last 12 months or so largely have made it easier for employees to raise whistleblower claims while making it harder for employers to defend them. Below are some of the highlights, including two important decisions effectively expanding the scope of protections under California’s general whistleblower law...

On May 30, 2023, the National Labor Relations Board’s (the “NLRB’s”) General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo (the “General Counsel”) issued Memo General Counsel 23-08 (the “Memo”), expansively finding that non‑competes with employees violate the National Labor Relations Act (the “Act”), except in limited circumstances. As...