Labor and Employment eNews

In settlement of a prior action, the parties agreed that stock issued to plaintiff in settlement was not compensation for services but instead compensation for his “capital/equitable contributions.” Defendants then issued IRS 1099 forms characterizing the settlement stock as non-employee compensation. The trial court held some (but not all) defendants breached the settlement agreement and issued fraudulent forms under Internal Revenue Code section 7434. The appellate court rejected all parties’ argument on appeal and affirmed the judgment. Read more

As we find ourselves at the intersection of change and challenge, I am reminded of the resilience that defines our legal community. Recent executive orders and actions targeting the legal community have stirred concerns and uncertainties. However, it is in these very moments that our commitment to justice, equity, and the rule of law shines brightest. Read more

Nabors performed oil well plug and abandonment work for the City. Nabors’s employees filed a class action lawsuit alleging they were entitled to higher wages under the prevailing wage laws because they performed public work for the City. Read more

Appearing as a harbinger of Spring, but weightier than that, the issue appearing in your mailboxes in March takes a deep dive into the often-tangled and increasingly litigated issue of worker classification in franchises. Read more

As we step into the month of February, I am filled with anticipation and excitement for the opportunities that lie ahead for our section. In particular, I am thrilled to announce that we are now actively recruiting new members for our Executive Committee. Read more

Wentworth v. Regents of the Univ. of Cal. (CA1/4 A168296 9/30/24) FEHA Interactive Process and Reasonable Accommodation | Information Practices Act Wentworth appealed summary adjudication for the University on causes of action under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (Gov. Code, § 12940 et seq.) Read more

Bailey alleged that a co-worker used a racial slur against her and that when she reported the incident, the human resources manager obstructed the filing of a formal complaint, engaged in a course of intimidating conduct, and threatened Bailey that she was “going to get it.” The Court held that a co-worker’s one-time use of a racial slur may be actionable harassment under the Fair Employment and Housing Act if it is sufficiently severe in light of the totality of the circumstances. The Court further held that a course of conduct that effectively seeks to withdraw an employee’s means of reporting and addressing racial harassment in the workplace is actionable as a retaliation claim under FEHA. Read more

Bristol SL Holdings v. CIGNA Health & Life (9th Cir. 23-55019 5/31/24) ERISA Affirming summary judgment for defendants, the court held that the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 preempted claims that a health plan administrator’s denial of reimbursements violated state law. Read more

Article XVI, section 18, subdivision (a) of the California Constitution sets forth the constitutional debt limitation applicable to cities: “No . . . city . . . shall incur any indebtedness or liability in any manner or for any purpose exceeding in any year the income and revenue provided for such year, without the assent of two-thirds of the voters of the public entity voting at an election to be held for that purpose.” The City Council adopted a resolution authorizing the issuance and sale of bonds to address unfunded liabilities in the City’s pension plans. The Taxpayers Association challenged the resolution, claiming it violated the constitutional debt limitation. The court held the City’s action did not trigger the debt limitation because under the resolution bonds may be issued only if they result in savings to the city. Read more

Alameda Health System is one of seven public entities that contract with the Alameda County Employees Retirement Association to provide retirement benefits to their employees. Read more