The March issue of our Section’s Labor & Employment Law Review has a special Arbitration theme, featuring three articles on recent developments in that area.
Steven B. Katz leads off with the MCLE self-study selection, titled “A Year of Turmoil in California Arbitration Law.” He covers both cases and statutory enactments.
That is followed by “OTO, L.L.C. v. Kho: Employee’s Perspective,” by David A. Rosenfeld. OTO was a recent decision of the California Supreme Court analyzing the unconscionability of an agreement to arbitrate in the employment context. Mr. Rosenfeld was counsel for the defendant and respondent Ken Kho, and argued the case to the Supreme Court.
The third article is “Assembly Bill 51: Past and Future,” by Matthew Helland and Juan Flores. AB 51 was the Legislature’s attempt to protect employees from waiving certain rights as a condition of employment. It was scheduled to take effect January 1st, but the state has been preliminarily enjoined from enforcing it. Mr. Helland and Mr. Flores provide the details.
In “Fresh Perspectives,” a column oriented toward new attorneys, guest writer Tierra Piens offers her suggestions for “Gaining Trial Experience.”o Add Value
In addition to the above, the issue features our usual case updates on employment law generally, wage and hour, public sector, and labor law, an update on cases pending before the California Supreme Court, and a calendar of upcoming educational opportunities.
Finally, in his Message Section Chair Erich Shiners provides a mini-tutorial on areas where public sector practice differs from representing employers, unions, or employees in the private sector.
Submissions are always welcome! We encourage you to take a look at our Guidelines and Editorial Policy and to send us your well-researched articles for consideration.
MCLE CREDIT: If you’re looking for MCLE credits, consider self-study articles from the Law Review, available here for as low as $20 a credit: http://cla.inreachce.com/.