Governor Brown recently approved SB 1255, AB 1744 and AB 2674, amending existing Labor Code section 226 relating to wage statements. Existing law requires all employers to provide employees with accurate itemized statements with specific information, either semimonthly or at the time of each payment of wages. Penalties up to $4,000 or actual damages, plus attorneys’ fees and costs, can be imposed on employers who willfully violate these requirements. Now, wage statements for temporary services employees must contain additional information. New law also clarifies when an employee has suffered an “injury” for purposes of obtaining the penalties, and provides employers with an affirmative defense for inadvertent, one-off violations.Continue Reading Amendments to Labor Code §226 Clarify Employers’ Wage Statement Obligations and Add Specific Requirements for Temporary Services Employers
Section
Governor Brown Signed AB 2103 to Make Clear that “MUTUAL WAGE AGREEMENTS” ARE ILLEGAL IN CALIFORNIA
As the L&E Law Blog readers may recall from the August 31, 2011 blog post and the teleseminar I conducted on September 14, 2011, the court in Arechiga v. Dolores Press, Inc. (2011) 192 Cal. App. 4th 567 was the sole California decision that held that “mutual wage agreements” were legal in California despite the express language in section 515 of the Labor Code.Continue Reading Governor Brown Signed AB 2103 to Make Clear that “MUTUAL WAGE AGREEMENTS” ARE ILLEGAL IN CALIFORNIA
New California Law Restricts How Long Attorneys Can Question Witnesses in Civil Depositions
By Ramona Carrillo on
Posted in New Legislation and Regulations
Gov. Brown signed AB 1875 on September 17, 2012. The new law essentially brings California civil procedure in line with federal civil procedure and, absent an exception or some other relief by the court, limits depositions to seven (7) hours in length. Continue Reading New California Law Restricts How Long Attorneys Can Question Witnesses in Civil Depositions
When Can a Supervisor be Held Individually Liable for Discriminating Against an Employee Based on His or Her Military Status? It Depends on Whether Federal or California Law Applies
By Ramona Carrillo on
By: Lizbeth V. West, Esq.
Most employers are aware of the federal law known as the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (“USERRA”) which is designed to protect those who serve in the armed forces from discrimination and retaliation. However, many California employers are unaware that section 394 of the California Military and Veterans Code also prohibits employers from discriminating against members of the armed forces (“Section 394”). Therefore, an employee who believes he/she has been discriminated against based on his/her military status has the right to pursue a claim under one or both laws.Continue Reading When Can a Supervisor be Held Individually Liable for Discriminating Against an Employee Based on His or Her Military Status? It Depends on Whether Federal or California Law Applies