California Workplace Law Blog

Insight & Commentary on California Workplace Law Issues & Developments

Latest from California Workplace Law Blog - Page 2

The district court in Chamber of Commerce of the United States, et al. v. Becerra, et al., E.D. Cal. Case No. 2:19-cv-2456, granted the request for a preliminary injunction enjoining the State of California from enforcing Assembly Bill 51 (AB 51) with respect to arbitration agreements governed by the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). AB 51 generally prohibits conditioning employment or employment-related benefits on the signing of an arbitration agreement covering claims under the California Fair…
The California Court of Appeal, in its recent decision in Schmidt, et al. v. Superior Court, County of Ventura 2020 Cal. App. LEXIS 54 (January 22, 2020), affirmed the trial court’s ruling in favor of the employer, the Ventura County Superior Court. Two court employees alleged that a security guard employed by a private company sexually harassed them during the courthouse entry screening process. The Court of Appeal acknowledged in its opinion that the “slow…
As previously addressed by the OSHA Law Blog, California’s Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board (“Standards Board”) considered a proposed standard that would allow employee access to their employer’s Injury and Illness Prevention Plan (“IIPP”). During its January 16th, 2020 meeting the Standards Board approved the proposed rule, which is now expected to take affect on January 1, 2021. Please find the rest of this article on our OSHA Law Blog here.…
Recently, the California Court of Appeal reviewed an appeal regarding citations issued against a sheet metal company, Nolte Sheet Metal in Nolte Sheet Metal, Inc. v. Occupational Safety and Health Appeals Board. One of the issues presented was whether Nolte freely and voluntarily consented to a Cal/OSHA inspection. Under the California Labor Code, Cal/OSHA is permitted to investigate and inspect any workplace after presenting appropriate credentials to the employer. If an employer refuses inspection, Cal/OSHA…
Earlier this week, the Southern District heard arguments regarding the grant of a preliminary injunction to prevent the enforcement of Assembly Bill 5 (“AB 5”) against motor carriers operating within California. Judge Benitez granted the preliminary injunction and concluded in his order that “there is little question that the State of California has encroached on Congress’ territory by eliminating motor carriers’ choice to use independent contractor drivers, a choice at the very heart of…
Northrop Grumman has agreed to pay $12,375,000 to settle a class action brought under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”) by participants in its 401(k) plan. The parties reached the initial terms of this settlement last year minutes before the start of the trial. The plaintiffs alleged in their complaint that the company’s administration of the 401(k) plan harmed the plan’s participants by using a costly management strategy for a risky investment fund and…
On the eve of the Assembly Bill 5 (“AB 5”) effective date, Judge Roger Benitez granted the California Trucking Association’s (“Association”) request for a Temporary Restraining Order to prevent enforcement of the law which the Association argued requires truckers to be classified as employees instead of independent contractors. On January 13th, Judge Benitez heard arguments regarding the Association’s request for a preliminary injunction.  Preemption based on the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act (“FAAAA”) is the…
While the trucking industry waits for the federal court to hear arguments on the California Trucking Association’s request for an injunction against application of AB5, Judge William Highberger of the Los Angeles Superior Court ruled on January 8, 2020, that AB 5 runs afoul of the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994 (“FAAAA”). The case is an enforcement action brought by the Los Angeles City Attorney’s office for misclassification of truck drivers. The…
Earlier today, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California heard oral arguments on whether the court should enter a preliminary injunction preventing the State of California (State) from enforcing AB 51 while the court resolves the underlying challenge to the new law on the merits. See Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, et al. v. Becerra, E.D. Cal. Case No. 2:19-cv-02456-KJM-DB. AB 51 purports to bar California employers from…
In Kim v. Reins International California, Inc. 18 Cal.App.5th 1052 (2017), the California Court of Appeal for the Second Appellate District held an employee-plaintiff that settled and dismissed his individual claims was no longer an “aggrieved employee” for purposes of standing to bring a claim for civil penalties under the Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”). Under PAGA, an “aggrieved employee” may bring a representative action on behalf of him or herself and other “aggrieved employees”…