Right in time for Halloween, See’s Candy Shops, Inc., has managed to sweet talk the California Court of Appeal into giving a sugary treat to employers in terms of wage-and-hour laws. According to the decision in See’s v. Superior Court, California employers might be able to use a “timekeeping policy that rounds employee punch in/out times to the nearest one-tenth of an hour” without violating the state’s strict overtime laws. The appellate court’s opinion is available at this link.Continue Reading See’s Candy Decision a Halloween Treat for Rounding Punch Times
Wage & Hour
Attention Employers: If Your Employees Perform ANY Work in Seattle, They Are Entitled to “Paid Sick and Safe Time”
By Ramona Carrillo on
Posted in Labor Law, Wage & Hour
Effective September 1, 2012, employees in the City of Seattle are entitled to accrue paid sick and paid safe time (“PSST”) for use when an employee or family member needs to take time off from work due to illness or a critical safety issue, such as domestic violence.Continue Reading Attention Employers: If Your Employees Perform ANY Work in Seattle, They Are Entitled to “Paid Sick and Safe Time”
Really? Again? – Another California Case Finds that the Parties’ Arbitration Agreement Will Not Govern their Dispute -in this Case a Dispute Centered on Whether or Not the Workers Were Independent Contractors or Employees
By Ramona Carrillo on
By: Lizbeth V. West, Esq.
There is a relatively long list of California cases that stand for the proposition that certain types of employment disputes are not subject to arbitration. On October 17, 2012, the Second District Court of Appeal’s decision in Elijahjuan et al v. Superior Court of LA County (Mike Campbell & Associates, Ltd., et al., as real parties in interest – referred to herein as “Defendants”) added to that list disputes between parties as to whether or not workers are in fact employees rather than independent contractors.Continue Reading Really? Again? – Another California Case Finds that the Parties’ Arbitration Agreement Will Not Govern their Dispute -in this Case a Dispute Centered on Whether or Not the Workers Were Independent Contractors or Employees
Warehouse Contractors Now Protected under Labor Code § 2810
By Ramona Carrillo on
Labor Code section 2810 states that "[a] person or entity may not enter into a contract or agreement for labor or services with a construction, farm labor, garment, janitorial, or security guard contractor, where the person or entity knows or should know that the contract or agreement does not include funds…
First “Commission” Agreements Must Be in Writing. Now the Definition of “Commissions” is Limited Under Labor Code § 2751
By Labor & Employment on
Last year, California revised Labor Code section 2751 such that any employment agreement involving “commission” payments would have to be put into writing with a signed copy of the agreement be given to the employee. Those revisions go into effect on January 1, 2013.
Continue Reading First “Commission” Agreements Must Be in Writing. Now the Definition of “Commissions” is Limited Under Labor Code § 2751