The California Supreme Court has ruled that an employee does not waive his rights to a Labor Commiss

The California Supreme Court has ruled that an employee does not waive his rights to a Labor Commiss

An agreement to arbitrate wage disputes can be enforceable so long as it provides an accessible and affordable process for resolving those disputes; even if a litigation-like arbitration procedure could be an acceptable process, an employee may not be coerced or misled into accepting this trade. (See, OTO, LLC v. Kho, 2019 S.O.S. 2266.) The California Supreme Court originally granted review in OTO v. Kho to decide whether an arbitral scheme resembling civil litigation can con

An ADA discrimination plaintiff must show that the adverse employment action would not have occurred

An ADA discrimination plaintiff must show that the adverse employment action would not have occurred

An employee plaintiff bringing a disability discrimination claim under 42 U.S.C. §12112 must show that an adverse employment action would not have occurred but for the disability. (Murray v. Mayo Clinic - filed Aug. 20, 2019 - 2019 S.O.S. 17-16803.) The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has affirmed a district court’s judgment, after a jury trial, in favor of the defendants in an employment discrimination action under Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The C

To establish a viable disability discrimination claim an employee must show a causal connection betw

To establish a viable disability discrimination claim an employee must show a causal connection betw

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has just held that even if a worker’s impairment can qualify as an impairment under the Americans with Disabilities Act, he/she could not establish a viable disability discrimination claim where he/she could not show a causal connection between his/her impairment and his/her termination. (See, Valtierra v. Medtronic Inc. - filed Aug. 20, 2019 - 2019 S.O.S. 17-15282.) In Valtierra, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s grant of summ

The California Supreme Court Holds that the nonpayment of wages does not support a claim of conversi

The California Supreme Court Holds that the nonpayment of wages does not support a claim of conversi

The California Supreme Court held this week that an employee cannot assert a conversion claim based on the nonpayment of wages. (See, Voris v. Lampert - filed Aug. 15, 2019 - 2019 S.O.S. 3989.) In Voris, the employee (Voris) sought to hold the owner of the company that employed him (Lampert) personally responsible for his unpaid wages on a theory of common law conversion. Voris claimed that by failing to pay the wages, the companies converted his personal property to their o

USERRA requires that returning service members, on reemployment, be treated as though they did not h

USERRA requires that returning service members, on reemployment, be treated as though they did not h

The U.S. Department of Labor’s Veterans Employment and Training Services (VETS) has released a fact sheet to help employers better understand their responsibilities toward reemployed service members under the pension provisions of the Uniform Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) and related regulations. USERRA requires that returning service members, on reemployment, be treated as though they did not have a break in civilian employment for the purpose of p

California Court of Appeals holds that on-duty meal breaks must be at least thirty minutes.

California Court of Appeals holds that on-duty meal breaks must be at least thirty minutes.

The Court of Appeals - First District - has ruled that Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Order No. 5 requires that an employer provide employees with meal periods of at least 30 minutes, regardless of whether they are on-duty or off-duty. (See, L’Chaim House, Inc. v. Division of Labor Standards Enforcement - filed July 31, 2019, First District, Div. One Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 3703.) In this appellate matter, L’Chaim House, Inc. and its owner, Cary Kopstein (collectively, L’Chai

Felahy Employment Lawyers: Contact us to discuss your legal questions - (323) 645-5197 & info@fe

Featured Posts

One Year Anniversary: Felahy Employment Lawyers Secure $5,000,000.00 Class Action Settlement

One Year Anniversary: Felahy Employment Lawyers Secure $5,000,000.00 Class Action Settlement

Recent Posts

Follow Us

Archive

Search By Tags

No tags yet.