Tag Archives: Labor Code

PENALTIES FOR NON-PAYMENT OF WAGES

Current law imposes, independent from other penalties, a civil penalty on employers who fail to pay wages as provided in certain sections of the Labor Code.  The Labor Commissioner may recover these penalties, which amount to $100 for the initial violation and $200 plus 25% of the amount unlawfully withheld for subsequent violations.  Now, AB… Read More »

INDEPENDENT CONTRACTS v. EMPLOYEES – CODIFYING THE ABC TEST

One of the most significant and widely publicized bills to emerge from this year’s Legislature was AB 5, which codifies and expands the “ABC test” that’s used to distinguish employees from independent contractors under the Industrial Welfare Commission (IWC) Wage Orders.  The ABC test was established by the California Supreme Court’s decision in Dynamex Operations West, Inc…. Read More »

BAN ON MANDATORY ARBITRATION AGREEMENTS EFFECTIVE JAN 1, 2020

AB 51 effectively bans mandatory arbitration agreements entered into between employers and employees.  The bill specifically prohibits an employer from requiring an applicant or employee to waive any right, forum or procedure for any employer violations of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) and the Labor Code.  The Legislature was clear this was intended to target… Read More »

UPDATES FOR CALIFORNIA EMPLOYERS – DECEMBER 2015

Continuing Violation Doctrine In Jumaane v. City of Los Angeles, plaintiff sued the City of Los Angeles for alleged disparate impact and disparate treatment discrimination, harassment, and retaliation based on his race.  Plaintiff alleged that adverse employment actions were taken against him in June 1999 and April 2011 when he was suspended from work.  Plaintiff… Read More »

UPDATES FOR CALIFORNIA EMPLOYERS – DECEMBER 2014

Employee Was Not Within Course and Scope of Employment While Driving Home from Work In Lobo v. Tamco, Daniel Lobo was killed by Luis Del Rosario while Del Rosario was leaving the premises of his employer, defendant Tamco, to go home for the day.  Del Rosario was driving his personal vehicle at the time of… Read More »

UPDATES FOR CALIFORNIA EMPLOYERS – SEPTEMBER 2014

FRANCHISOR LIABLE? In Patterson v. Domino’s Pizza, the plaintiff alleged that she had been sexually harassed by her supervisor.  She sued both her direct employer, who was a franchisee of Domino’s Pizza, as well as Domino’s Pizza itself as the franchisor.  Plaintiff claimed that Domino’s Pizza was liable because it was her joint employer, and… Read More »