Kate Gold

Photo of Kate Gold

Kate Gold is a partner in the Labor & Employment Law Department in the Los Angeles office.

Kate has over 25 years of experience representing clients in a range of industries, across all areas of employment law.  An experienced litigator, she has represented clients in all types of employment-related suits, including class and collective actions, discrimination, retaliation and harassment, non-compete and wage/hour matters.  In addition to litigating, she conducts high-level workplace investigations and routinely counsels clients on matters involving the full range of state and federal employment issues.

Latest Articles

Employers would be forgiven for feeling figurative whiplash from all of the developments surrounding the EEO-1 in recent weeks. After understanding they would not have to submit pay data with their EEO-1 submissions (referred to as “Component 2 data”), in a series of rulings. Judge Tanya Chutkan reinstated the obligation. Since then, employers have been reading tea leaves and following developments, trying to figure what will be required of them and by when. And while…
On April 29, 2019, the EEOC issued the following statement regarding the recent EEO-1 developments: Notice of Immediate Reinstatement of Revised EEO-1: Pay Data Collection EEO-1 filers should begin preparing to submit Component 2 data for calendar year 2018 by September 30, 2019, in light of the court’s recent decision in National Women’s Law Center, et al., v. Office of Management and Budget, et al., Civil Action No. 17-cv-2458 (D.D.C.).  The EEOC expects to begin collecting…
Introduction: On April 25, 2019, Judge Tanya Chutkan ordered the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to collect detailed data on employee compensation and hours worked from covered employers sorted by job category, pay band, race, ethnicity, and gender (“Component 2” of the EEO-1 form) by September 30, 2019.  The reporting requirement applies to all employers with more than 100 employees. The Component 2 requirement had been adopted during the Obama Administration but its implementation…
On February 28, 2019, a Los Angeles jury issued a verdict of $1.5 million in damages to a former employee who alleged his employer retaliated against him for reporting misconduct in violation of the False Claims Act (“FCA”), 31 U.S.C. § 3730(h), the Defense Contractor Whistleblower Protection Act (“DCWPA”), 10 U.S.C. § 2409, and California’s whistleblower statute, California Labor Code section 1102.5.  Lillie v. ManTech Int’l Corp, No. 17-cv-02538 (C.D. Cal.).  The verdict form can…