Tag: California Supreme Court

California’s Estrada Decision and Impact on Employers and PAGA Claims

Following Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, Inc., the California Supreme Court’s employee-friendly Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) ruling earlier this year, employers must remain more diligent than ever to prevent and mitigate costly wage and hour litigation. Estrada eliminated one of employers’ central tools to curb sprawling PAGA claims: requesting dismissal based on the court’s […]

Why Can’t We Be Friends: Would Lyle Case Decision Be Same Today?

What if I told you that the California Supreme Court has ruled that under certain circumstances, an employee being exposed to lewd conduct in the workplace – including sexual discussions, sexually explicit pictures, and colleagues pantomiming masturbation – is not enough to sustain an actionable sexual harassment claim? In light of the recent spate of […]


Taxi Drivers: Employees or Independent Contractors?

With lawsuits against ride-sharing companies like Uber and Lyft in the news, the issue of whether a worker is an independent contractor or an employee has been getting quite a bit of attention recently. The following case involved an employee performing what now seems like an almost old-fashioned occupation: taxicab driver.

Pension Reform for California

By Jeff Sloan and Susan Yoon, Renne Sloan Holtzman Sakai LLP In a groundbreaking decision issued in August, the California Court of Appeal shot down a constitutional challenge brought by employees and their unions against the Marin County Employees’ Retirement Association’s (MCERA) action to eliminate certain forms of “spiking” payments from being included in the […]

No Rest Breaks for the Weary in California

By Emily A. Mertes and Katharine Essick Since the California Supreme Court’s seminal meal and rest break decision Brinker v. Superior Court in 2012, employers have wrestled with whether, in their particular circumstances, it would be impractical to provide their employees with two separate rest breaks before and after a meal period during an 8-hour […]

Arbitration Clause Is A-OK for California Supreme Court

By: Beth A. Kahn and Hubert T. Lee Arbitration agreements are popular among California employers, but in many instances the employer has to go to court in order enforce the agreement. Recently, the California Supreme Court upheld an arbitration provision in a sales agreement, even though quite a few of the terms were arguable—but also […]

4 Pitfalls of Improper FMLA/CFRA Tracking

It is generally in your best interest to capture all absences that are Family and Medical Leave (FMLA)‐related, says consultant Kristi McKinzey, PHR. She offers four common hazards employers face when they don’t track all absences.

What Are the Rules for Mixed-Motive Bias in California?

In early 2013, the California Court of Appeals ruled in favor of an employee in a so-called “mixed-motive” case (when an employer has both unlawful and legitimate reasons for taking an adverse employment action) brought under the state Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA).

Changes To California Mixed-Motive Rules

Yesterday, we looked at the case of a California employee, Lorena Alamo, who successfully established that her termination was due to improper “mixed motives” (the employer had both unlawful and legitimate reasons for the firing).