On July 25, 2024, the California Supreme Court upheld Proposition 22 (“Prop. 22”) in a major win for gig-economy companies Uber, Lyft and DoorDash. This ruling marks the end of a multi-year legal battle over Prop. 22 raised by a group of drivers and a major labor union that challenged Prop. 22 as unconstitutional, arguing that it interferes with lawmakers’ authority over matters of workers’ compensation.(more…)
Employment Law Update for 2025
As employers prepare to update their policies and practices for 2025, there are a number of new laws to consider. Unless otherwise noted, the laws discussed below will be effective as of January 1, 2025. (more…)
California Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Severance Analysis for Arbitration Agreements
On July 15, 2024, the California Supreme Court issued a new ruling further defining the contours of California law regarding the interpretation and enforcement of arbitration agreements. In Ramirez v. Charter Communications, Inc., the Court emphasized that there is no bright line, quantitative rule governing when a court may sever unconscionable terms, as opposed to when it must void the entire contract.(more…)
California Supreme Court to Decide Fate of Waiver of Arbitration When Fees Are Paid Late
The California Supreme Court (“Supreme Court”) granted review of Hohenshelt v. Superior Court (2024) 99 Cal.App.5th 1319, which held the defendant’s payment of arbitration fees after thirty (30) days from issuance of the invoice entitled the plaintiff to withdraw from arbitration. The Supreme Court will decide whether the state law that permits waiver of arbitration when fees are paid after thirty (30) days is pre-empted by the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”).(more…)
New Guidance from the United States Department of Labor Regarding Independent Contractor Classification
On January 10, 2024, the Wage and Hour Division of the United States Department of Labor (“DOL”) issued a new “Final Rule” addressing analysis for classifying workers as either independent contractors or employees under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”). The Final Rule went into effect on March 11, 2024.(more…)
The U.S. Supreme Court Decision in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis Lowers the Standard for Employees Challenging Job Transfers under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
On April 17, 2024, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, holding that an employee alleging a discriminatory job transfer must show that the transfer inflicted “some harm with respect to an identifiable term or condition of employment,” but, that such harm “need not be significant” to violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”). Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, Missouri, 601 U.S. —-, at *2 (2024). (more…)
The Federal Trade Commission Bans Noncompete Agreements Nationwide
On April 23, 2024, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) issued a final rule banning noncompete agreements in the United States, effective September 4, 2024. Immediately after the FTC approved the final rule, multiple entities filed lawsuits challenging the rule and seeking injunctions to postpone the effective date. Currently it is unclear if and when the rule will go into effect, but employers should be prepared for the rule to become effective.(more…)
Employment Law Update for 2024
The California Legislature has been busy creating new rights for employees and responsibilities for employers. As employers prepare for 2024, and update their policies and practices, there are a number of new laws to consider. Unless otherwise noted, all law discussed below will be effective as of January 1, 2024.(more…)
New California Statutes Will Impose Hightened Requirements and Consequences on Companies With Improper Noncompete Agreements
California’s strong public policy disfavors noncompete agreements. Under California Business & Professions Code Section 16600 “every contract by which any one is restrained from engaging in a lawful profession, trade, or business of any kind is to that extent void.” Recent California law significantly increases the stakes for employers who utilize such improper covenants in their employee contracts. (more…)
New Bill Signals Widening Gulf Between California and the United States Supreme Court on Arbitration Policy
On July 17, 2023, the California Supreme Court issued its ruling in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. (2023) 14 Cal. 5th 1104. In that opinion, the Court departed from the United States Supreme Court’s guidance in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana (2022) 142 S.Ct. 1906 and, contrary to the reasoning of Viking River, found that a plaintiff suing under the Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (“PAGA”) retains standing to pursue his or her representative PAGA claims in court, even when his or her individual PAGA claims are compelled to arbitration. (See our prior discussion on this issue here.)(more…)