Last year, new California legislation effective January 1, 2019 expanded the mandatory sexual harassment prevention training requirements for California employees. That law required that, by January 1, 2020, employers with 5 or more employees must provide their supervisory employees with two hours of classroom or other effective interactive training and education AND must provide their
Labor Law
Ninth Circuit Clarifies the Interactive Process Does Not Apply to Public Accommodations under Title III
By Ramona Carrillo on
By: Nicholas E. Ma
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently confirmed in Tauscher v. Phoenix Board of Realtors, Inc. that while employers must engage in an “interactive process” with disabled employees to explore possible accommodations, there is no interactive process requirement for public accommodations and services. By the same token, businesses and entities providing public accommodations cannot discharge the duties they owe to disabled patrons because of a failure to engage in the interactive process.
Title III of the ADA provides that no individual shall be discriminated against on the basis of disability in the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of any place of public accommodation by any person who owns, leases (or leases to), or operates a place of public accommodation. (42 U.S.C. § 12182(a).) A public accommodation must furnish “appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to ensure effective communication with individuals with disabilities.” (28 C.F.R. § 36.303(c)(1).) While “[a] public accommodation should consult with individuals with disabilities whenever possible to determine what type of auxiliary aid is needed to ensure effective communication,” the regulations make clear that “the ultimate decision as to what measures to take rests with the public accommodation, provided that the method chosen results in effective communication.” (Id. § 36.303(c)(1)(ii).)
Continue Reading Ninth Circuit Clarifies the Interactive Process Does Not Apply to Public Accommodations under Title III
Will Assembly Bill 5 – and the Answer to the Question of … What Test Applies When Classifying Independent Contractors … Make it to the Governor’s Desk this Year?
By Beth V. West on
If you’re like me – and thousands of other attorneys, business owners, and individuals in California – you’ve probably been following the progress of Assembly Bill (“AB”) 5 and holding your breath and wondering with anticipation if Governor Newsom will sign the Bill if it makes it to his desk. As a reminder, AB 5 is the proposed Bill to codify the decision in Dynamex v. Superior Court so that the very strict “ABC Test” would apply in order to determine the status of a worker as an employee or independent contractor for all provisions of the Labor Code and the Unemployment Insurance Code, except in certain industries and professions.
Continue Reading Will Assembly Bill 5 – and the Answer to the Question of … What Test Applies When Classifying Independent Contractors … Make it to the Governor’s Desk this Year?
The Request and Use of Background Checks by California Employers
By Shauna N. Correia on
Posted in Employee Privacy Rights, Labor Law
By: Shauna Correia and Nicholas Ma
Many employers routinely conduct background checks of potential and current employees. It comes to no surprise that in the current digital age, employers can obtain extensive background information on applicants and employees quicker than ever from third party reporting companies. However, employers must remain vigilant to avoid receiving information…
Certain Delivery Drivers Are Exempt from the Federal Arbitration Act and May Proceed with Class Actions
By Ryan Abernethy on
Posted in Labor Law
In this age of expensive class-action litigation, many California companies have found solace in their arbitration agreements. Under certain circumstances, the enforcement of such agreements includes the dismissal of class action claims. This has largely been made possible by the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) which requires judges to enforce a wide range of written arbitration agreements notwithstanding contrary state law. California courts have a long history of delivering rulings that attempt to narrow the scope and effect of the FAA. As one of the latest examples, the California Court of Appeal for the Fifth District held that truck drivers who complete only intrastate deliveries are exempt from the FAA because their work was part of a “continuous stream of interstate travel.”
Continue Reading Certain Delivery Drivers Are Exempt from the Federal Arbitration Act and May Proceed with Class Actions