Tag: California Supreme Court

Ban on Gay Marriage Ruled Unconstitutional in California

In a divided 4-3 ruling, the California Supreme Court has declared unconstitutional state laws limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples.1 The case arose out of San Francisco’s move, back in 2004, to issue marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples. The decision was immediately challenged, and the California Supreme Court ruled then that the marriages were […]

New California Supreme Court CFRA Ruling: Holding Down a Job While on Medical Leave from Another Employer Not Automatic Grounds for Denying CFRA Leave

Suppose you have an employee who requests medical leave because she has a medical condition that, she claims, interferes with her ability to do her job. In the course of determining whether this time off qualifies as protected family and medical leave, you discover that she is continuing to work for another employer, performing similar […]

Meal Breaks: What Are Our Meal Period Obligations for Truck Drivers Whose Hours Are Regulated by the CPUC and the DOT?

Many of our employees are commercial truck drivers whose hours are regulated under CPUC and DOT rules. Do we need to provide meal breaks or make sure that these employees take meal breaks? CPUC and DOT rules regulate the number of hours that a driver can work per day, but are we still bound by […]

Benefits: Can We Screen Out Unhealthy Applicants When We Hire?

Our healthcare premiums have gone through the roof (whose haven’t?), and management is putting pressure on me to get the costs down. They think we can have an impact by establishing health criteria to screen out applicants who will be likely to have high health bills, e.g., smokers, those who are overweight and/or have high […]

Wage and Hour: California High Court Backs Employer on Expense Reimbursement

In an important new ruling, the California Supreme Court has approved an employer’s practice of paying increased salaries and commissions to cover employees’ mileage expenses. At issue was Labor Code Section 2802, which requires employers to indemnify employees for necessary expenditures they incur as a result of the job. The employees here had argued that […]