Labor Law

Subscribe to Labor Law via RSS

LaborEmpSeminarLogoSummary of Program

Most employers know that it is crucial to have well trained supervisors to help ensure that rank and file employees perform their jobs effectively and efficiently.  However, many employers don’t realize how important it is that supervisors be trained to understand the many employment laws that govern the workplace.  Untrained supervisors can take actions (or fail to take actions) that result in significant legal consequences for an employer.  Come join the employment lawyers at Weintraub Tobin for a discussion of best practices for training supervisors and reducing the potential for liability.

Program Highlights

  • An overview of employment laws that impact the workplace and common mistakes supervisors make when they don’t understand those laws.
  • Tips for effective communication between supervisors and employees, including how to give constructive performance feedback.
  • Common supervisor mistakes when hiring and firing.
  • The importance of consistent, objective, and timely discipline.
  • Preventing and responding to harassment and other Equal Employment Opportunity complaints.
  • Documentation:  The good, the bad and the ugly.

Continue Reading Upcoming Seminar: Well Trained Supervisors – Your First Line of Defense

The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to review California high court’s landmark decision in Iskanian v. CLS Transportation Los Angeles, which held that arbitration agreements with mandatory class waivers are generally enforceable, but carved out an exception for the state’s Private Attorney General Act (“PAGA”) claims.

As discussed in our prior blog post, The…

Brenden Begley_retouchMany employers have arbitration agreements wherein employees agree to waive the right to file a lawsuit against the employer under various laws, including the California’s Private Attorney General Act (“PAGA”).  Employers were disappointed when the California Supreme Court ruled last June that such waivers of PAGA lawsuits are invalid, at least in state court.  See Iskanian v. CLS Transportation Los Angeles, LLC, 59 Cal.4th 348 (2014).

However, a number of federal trial judges in the Golden State subsequently disagreed and ruled that PAGA waivers are enforceable in their courts.  See, e.g., Ortiz v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., E.D. Cal. Case No. 2:13-cv-01619 (Sept. 30, 2014).  Because a PAGA waiver still may be enforceable against an employee in federal court, many employers have either kept or inserted such waivers in their arbitration agreements.

This week it became apparent that including a PAGA waiver may destroy an employer’s ability to require arbitration in any type of lawsuit, be it under PAGA or some other theory (e.g., alleged discrimination, harassment, retaliation, or wage-and-hour or meal-and-rest-period violations).  Specifically, the California Court of Appeal ruled that a PAGA waiver will invalidate an entire arbitration agreement in state court if that agreement also includes a non-severability clause.  See Montano v. The Wet Seal Retail, Inc., Cal. Ct. App. Case No. B244107 (Jan. 7, 2015).
Continue Reading The New PAGA-Waiver Trap Door

LaborEmpSeminarLogo2014  – A Year in Review

2015 – An Interesting Year Ahead

Summary of Program

Join the attorneys from Weintraub Tobin’s Labor and Employment Group as they discuss important legal developments from 2014 and review the complexities of a number of new laws facing employers in 2015.

Sacramento Date:    January 8, 2015

Time:   9:00 a.m.…

Brenden Begley_retouchJust in time for the holidays, the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) and the U.S. Department of Labor (“DOL”) have delivered additional workplace protections for workers and prospective unions this month.  Whether those government agencies are viewed as Santa or the Grinch coming down workplace chimneys depends upon one’s perspective.

Specifically, the NLRB gave a sugary treat to unions and employees who want union representation by ruling in early December that, under most circumstances, workers must be permitted to use their employers’ email systems for purposes of union-organizing activities.  Then, in mid-December, the NLRB stuffed the stockings of unions and employees who desire union representation by issuing a final rule shortening the time to hold an election to determine whether a majority of workers want to be unionized.

Many employers worry that this speedy-election change, which becomes effective on April 14, 2015, will diminish management’s ability to stage an anti-union campaign prior to voting.  As such, employers who are concerned about unionization likely will focus on year-round anti-union avoidance programs, instead of anti-union campaigns that commence only upon the filing of a representation petition.
Continue Reading U.S. Government Agencies: Santa or Grinch?