A new year with the California legislature has just begun. Is the budget on the top of legislator’s mind? Is their first priority creating an environment conducive to putting out of work Californian’s back to work? Unfortunately, the answer to both these questions is a resounding NO. Instead, legislators are focused on allowing people to come to work after smoking pot.
LAW ALERT: Attention Food-Service Employers:Your Employees May Be Required To Have a Food Handlers Card By July 1, 2011
By Beth V. West on
Posted in New Legislation and Regulations
Before leaving office, Governor Schwarzenegger signed Senate Bill 602 which amended California’s Health and Safety Code to provide that, except in certain circumstances, all “food handlers” must obtain a food handler card on or before July 1, 2011. Before Senate Bill 602, the law generally required an owner or designated employee of a food establishment to successfully pass an approved and accredited food safety certification examination from an accredited certification organization.
LAW ALERT: Jumping Off the Cliff – Supreme Court Expands Retaliation To Protect Employee for His Fiancee’s Protected Activity
By Alden Parker on
Posted in Retaliation and Wrongful Termination
Yesterday’s decision in Thompson v. North American Stainless (S.Ct. 1/24/11) illustrates that retaliation may now be the most employee/plaintiff friendly area in employment law. There, a unanimous Court held that an employee, who was fired for his fiancée’s protected activity, was also protected by Title VII.
LAW ALERT: Employee Email Communications with Counsel Not Privileged According to Recent Third District Court of Appeals Decision
By Charles L. Post on
Posted in Employee Privacy Rights
In a decision that has already stirred substantial controversy, the California Court of Appeal recently held that an employee’s communications to her attorney are not privileged because they took place on her employer’s email system. Privileged communications cannot be discovered or used as evidence in a lawsuit.
LAW ALERT: Better than their Barbacoa, Chipotle’s Court of Appeal Victory Provides Much Needed Clarification Regarding Employer’s Responsibility For Providing Meal & Rest Periods
By Alden Parker on
Posted in Wage & Hour
On October 30, 2010, the California Court of Appeal published its’ decision in Hernandez v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc., B216004 (Published 10/30/10). Restaurants and California employers have been inundated with class action lawsuits involving meal and rest period claims. The case addressed California’s meal and rest period laws on both an individual and class action lawsuit basis. California employers have long been waiting for the California Supreme Court’s decision in Brinker Restaurants v. Superior Court. Until the Brinker decision is issued, our appetite will have to be satisfied with the Chipotle decision.