Labor and Employment eNews

The 9th circuit panel held that an employer does not violate the Fair Credit Reporting Act by providing a FCRA disclosure simultaneously with other employment materials, and by providing a FCRA disclosure simultaneously with other employment materials, and by failing to place a FCRA authorization on a standalone document. Read more

Message from the Chair Erich Shiners from the Labor and Employment Law monthly eNews Read more

A rundown of newly-published labor and employment cases from the Labor and Employment Law Section eNews. Read more

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. Read more

Cacho v. Eurostar, Inc. (CA2/7 B284827, filed 12/4/19, ord. pub. 12/23/19) Wage & Hour/Class Certification Read more

Lehman v. Nelson (9th Cir. 18-35321 12/3/19) ERISA Plaintiff Richard Lehman, an electrician, filed a class action against the Trustees of IBEW under ERISA. Plaintiff was a member of a different local union pension fund. When he was temporarily employed outside his home fund, his employer contributed to the local fund in the place where the work was performed. Plaintiff’s home fund and the Pacific Cost Fund were signatories to the Electrical Industry Pension Reciprocal Agreement, under which “travelers” like plaintiff could elect… Read more

Berroteran v. Superior Court (CA2/1 B296639 10/29/19) Admissibility of Former Employees’ Depositions The Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s exclusion of videotaped deposition testimony of nine of the Respondent’s employees and former employees.  The Court disagreed with the holding of Wahlgren v. Coleco Industries, Inc. (1984) 151 Cal.App.3d 543 (Wahlgren) to the extent it espouses a blanket proposition that a party has a different motive in examining a witness at a deposition than at trial and determined that the Respondent had the… Read more

This week, at the CLA Annual Meeting, our new Section leadership will begin their terms. Welcome to incoming Chair Erich Shiners, Vice Chair Deborah Maddux, and Secretary Adam Fiss! I enjoyed this year as Section Chair tremendously, and I am equally thrilled to step down from the role. I look forward to the steep drop in emails that will instantly accompany the change! Read more

The November issue of our Section’s Labor & Employment Law Review celebrates the 60th Anniversary of the enactment of the Unruh Civil Rights Act. Former DFEH Director Phyllis Cheng provides a retrospective in her article “The Unruh Civil Rights Act at 60.” Workplace investigator and former Chair of the Section Amy Oppenheimer offers an article, co-authored with Aleza Trigueros, titled "The Meaning of Due Process in Harassment Investigations." Read more

Naranjo v. Spectrum Security Services, Inc.
(CA2/4 B256232 9/26/19)
Wage and Hour Class Action. In a wage and hour class action alleging violations of Labor Code sections 203, 226.7 and 226, the court of appeal held in part: “(1) at-will, on-call, hourly, nonexempt employees who are paid for on-duty meal periods are also entitled to premium wages if the employer does not have a written agreement that includes an on-duty meal period revocation clause (§ 226.7); (2) unpaid premium wages for meal break violations accrue prejudgment interest at seven percent; (3) unpaid premium wages for meal break violations do not entitle employees to additional remedies pursuant to sections 203 and 226 if their pay or pay statements during the course of the violations include the wages earned for on-duty meal breaks, but not the unpaid premium wages; [and] (4) without section 226 penalties, attorney fees pursuant to section 226, subdivision (e) may not be awarded.” Read more