Anthony DiBenedetto

Photo of Anthony DiBenedetto

Anthony DiBenedetto is an associate in the Labor & Employment Law Department where he represents employers in all areas of labor and employment law, including unlawful discrimination, harassment, and retaliation claims, state and federal wage and hour class actions, trade secrets claims, and traditional labor law. Anthony also investigates and defends against whistleblower claims. In addition, Anthony counsels clients on compliance with state and federal employment laws and on developing, implementing and enforcing personnel policies and procedures, and advises employers with respect to labor and employment issues that arise in a variety of corporate transactions.

Anthony’s experience includes representation of employers in a variety of industries, including professional sports, telecommunications, asset management, automotive manufacturing, financial services, global food service, grocery chains, security services, retail, and media and entertainment.

Latest Articles

In Erhart v. BofI Holding, Inc., Case No. 15-cv-02287, (S.D. Cal. Feb. 14, 2017), a bank’s internal auditor reported alleged misconduct to federal agencies, engaged in self-help discovery by appropriating the bank’s confidential information, and allegedly widely disseminated such information. When the bank alleged that this conduct violated the parties’ confidentiality agreement and state and federal law, the employee countered that his appropriation and disclosures were protected by whistleblower statutes.  As discussed below, the…
On August 30, 2016, the SEC issued a $22 million whistleblower bounty award to an individual “whose detailed tip and extensive assistance helped the agency halt a well-hidden fraud” at the whistleblower’s employer. The Acting Chief of the SEC’s Office of the Whistleblower, credited the “company insider,” stating “[w]ithout this whistleblower’s courage, information, and assistance, it would have been extremely difficult for law enforcement to discover this securities fraud on its own.”…
On April 4, 2016, Governor Brown signed Senate Bill 3, which will increase California’s minimum wage annually, reaching $15 per hour for employers with at least 26 employees by January 1, 2022.  This bill enacts the highest statewide minimum wage in the nation, on par with New York, which enacted a bill mandating a $15 minimum wage last week. Governor Brown opposed the bill just a few months ago, stating that it “would put…
New California anti-discrimination, anti-harassment, and pregnancy disability leave regulations go into effect on April 1, 2016.  The substantive law regarding these issues has not changed.  However, the new amendments enumerate detailed requirements regarding anti-harassment policies and investigations, and institute additional notice and recordkeeping requirements. Anti-Discrimination and Harassment Regulations The new anti-discrimination and harassment regulations clarify an employer’s duty to take reasonable steps to prevent discriminatory and harassing conduct.  Specifically, the amended regulations require employers to…
In Cardenas v. M. Fanaian, D.D.S., Inc., Case No. F069305 (Cal. App. 5 Dist.), a California Court of Appeal determined that Plaintiff Cardenas could pursue a California Labor Code Section 1102.5 retaliation claim against her former employer, M. Fanaian, D.D.S., Inc. (“Company”) based on her allegation that it discharged her because she reported her coworker’s alleged theft of her property to law enforcement authorities—a complaint that did not implicate any wrongdoing by the Company itself.…
We recently held a webinar titled California’s New Paid Sick Leave Law: Are you Ready for the Big Changes Ahead? to help prepare employers for California’s new paid sick leave law.  More than 400 people registered for the webinar, and we received well over 100 participant questions. We realized that everyone — including those who could not attend the presentation — would benefit from viewing the questions and our responses. The full Q&A follows.…
San Francisco recently enacted two sweeping ordinances that are being referred to as the “Retail Workers Bill of Rights” (you can find the ordinances here and here). The new laws impose strict new requirements on retail employers and establishments in the City of San Francisco. While the ordinances became effective on January 5, 2015, employers will have until July 3, 2015 to comply. Below is an overview of the new laws’ requirements. Affected Employers—“Formula…
In Diego v. Pilgrim United Church of Christ, — Cal.Rptr.3d —-, 2014 WL 6602601 (Cal. App. 4 Dist.) (available here), the California Court of Appeal determined that Cecilia Diego (Plaintiff) could pursue a common law public policy retaliation claim against her former employer, Pilgrim United Church of Christ (the Church), based on her allegations that the Church discharged her because it believed she complained of public safety issues to a government agency, even though…
On September 3, 2014, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld certification of a class of approximately 800 nonexempt insurance claims adjusters who claimed they worked overtime without compensation despite the employer’s lawful written policy to pay nonexempt employees for all hours worked. In Jimenez v. Allstate Ins. Co., the Ninth Circuit upheld certification after finding three common questions existed.  First, whether Allstate had an unofficial policy of discouraging employees from reporting overtime;…