Recent Blog Posts
- AB 5, Dynamex and Borello: What Standard Governs Independent Contractor Status In California? Continue Reading… It is no secret that independent contractor misclassification claims are being filed against employers with a great deal of frequency, often as class actions and often in California. Many of those lawsuits have been filed against gig economy companies. But, of course, they are not the only companies facing such claims.
As a result, many companies that classify workers as independent contractors are asking a basic question, “Are those workers properly classified?”
It sounds like such a simple question, one that should... More
- Postmates Risks Judicial Rebuke by Filing Suit Against 10,000 of Its Drivers to Try to Escape Individual Arbitrations Continue Reading… Be careful what you ask for.
We have used that expression frequently when writing about recent federal court orders requiring DoorDash and Postmates to conduct thousands of individual arbitrations in California pursuant to the terms of their arbitration agreements with their drivers.
Thousands of individual arbitrations for which DoorDash and Postmates would have to pay many millions of dollars in arbitration fees alone.
The risk of dozens, hundreds or even thousands of individual arbitrations attends any time an employer seeks the benefits of an arbitration... More
- Employers Facing Layoffs Need to Be Mindful of State Laws Regarding Final Pay Continue Reading… In the coming days, weeks and perhaps months, many employers will have difficult decisions to make about their operations and their workforces. With their operations shutting down or running at less than capacity, many employers will decide that they must lay off employees.
It’s a decision that no employer wishes for or enjoys. And it is one that poses some risks.
Not only must employers take steps to ensure that layoff decisions are made in a manner that does not adversely impact... More
- DoorDash Isn’t the Only Company That Has Been Ordered to Conduct More Than 5,000 Individual Arbitrations – Postmates Has Been, Too Continue Reading… Recently, we wrote here about a federal court order requiring DoorDash to conduct more than 5,000 individual arbitrations under the terms of its mandatory arbitration agreements, with each arbitration to address claims that it had misclassified its drivers as independent contractors.
The order would fall in the category of “Be Careful What You Wish For.” In seeking to avoid class or collective actions by having employees sign arbitration agreements with class action waivers, employers face the possibility of hundreds or thousands... More
- California Supreme Court Holds That Time Spent Waiting by Apple Retail Employees for Exit Searches Is Compensable Under California Law Continue Reading… It is not unusual for businesses at risk of employee theft to implement security screenings for employees as they exit the employer’s facilities. Such screenings are especially common in industries where small, costly items could easily be slipped into a pocket or handbag – jewelry, smartphones, computer chips, etc.
In light of the California Supreme Court’s decision in Frlekin v. Apple, Inc., those security screenings now seem likely to lead to even more litigation wherein employees claim that they were not... More
- Be Careful What You Wish For: California Federal Judge Compels DoorDash to Conduct – and Pay for – More Than 5,000 Individual Arbitrations Continue Reading… It’s no secret that many employers have employees sign arbitration agreements with class and collective action waivers in the hopes of avoiding the massive wage-hour lawsuits that have become so prevalent in the past two decades.
Nor is it any secret that, following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Epic Systems affirming that such agreements can be valid, even more employers have chosen to use them with their workforces.
But, in discussing with clients whether to implement such agreements, lawyers worth their... More
- California Federal Court Issues Detailed Decision Explaining Its Preliminary Injunction to Block Anti-Arbitration Law Continue Reading… As we wrote here, United States District Court Judge Kimberly J. Mueller of the Eastern District of California wrote a brief “minute order” explaining that she was issuing a preliminary injunction to halt enforcement of California’s controversial anti-arbitration law, known as AB 51.
The new law, which was set to go into effect on January 1, 2020, would outlaw mandatory arbitration agreements with employees. AB 51 would also prohibit arbitration agreements that would require individuals to take affirmative action to be excluded from... More
- Federal Court Issues Preliminary Injunction to Stop California’s Controversial Anti-Arbitration Law Continue Reading… The California Legislature’s attempt to circumvent both the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) and the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Epic Systems by crafting a new law prohibiting California employers from requiring employees to enter into arbitration agreements is off to a rocky start in the courts, to say the least.
As discussed below, a federal court has issued a preliminary injunction enjoining enforcement of California’s controversial new anti-arbitration statute known as AB 51. Barring some new development, it now appears clear... More
- Federal Judge Grants Preliminary Injunction to Prevent Enforcement of California’s Controversial New Independent Contractor Statute to Independent Truckers Continue Reading… As we have written here, the day before California’s controversial AB 5 was set to go into effect, U.S. District Court Judge Roger Benitez issued a temporary restraining order to block enforcement of the law as to approximately 70,000 independent truckers.
Subsequently, Judge Benitez granted a preliminary injunction to prevent enforcement of the statute to those truckers.
In reaching his decision, Judge Benitez concluded that, as to independent truckers, the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act preempts AB 5.
The preliminary injunction is a... More
- Federal Court Extends TRO to Enjoin Enforcement of New California Arbitration Statute Continue Reading… As we recently wrote here, on December 29, 2019, just days before California’s new arbitration statute known as AB 51 was to go into effect, a federal judge in the United States District Court of the Eastern District of California granted a temporary restraining order (“TRO”) to enjoin enforcement of AB 51.
The new law, which was set to go into effect on January 1, 2020, would outlaw mandatory arbitration agreements with employees.
AB 51 would also prohibit arbitration agreements that would require... More