Articles Posted in wage and hour lawsuit

As of July 1, 2023, California is set to implement new minimum wage increases, ushering in significant changes for workers across the state.  Our Orange County wage and hour lawyers can help you understand the new laws.  These increases, designed to address the rising cost of living and improve income equality, will impact both employees and employers. In this blog post, we delve into the details of California’s minimum wage increases and their implications for businesses and workers.

Overview of Minimum Wage Increases:

Effective July 1, 2023, California’s minimum wage will experience a notable increase. The specific wage rates vary based on the size of the employer, with different rates applicable to small businesses and larger companies. Let’s explore the key details:

The death of a loved one can feel like you’re being torn into two – with waves of intense, very difficult emotions washing over you at any moment. In the immediate aftermath of such a loss, people need a moment to breathe, be surrounded by others they love, and start the long process of healing. That’s where California employee bereavement rights kick in. California Bereavement Leave violation

As our Los Angeles employment lawyers can explain, California law guarantees most employees up to 5 days of bereavement leave from work for the death of a qualifying family member (spouse, child, parent, sibling, grandparent, grandchild, domestic partner, or parent-in-law). Employers are allowed to grant it for the loss of someone outside these categories with whom you were close, but they aren’t required to.

The law allows for five days for the death of each qualifying family member. So if you suddenly lose three of your close relatives – even if it happened all at once – you would be entitled to 15 days, rather than just 5. You have three months to use your bereavement leave, but it doesn’t have to be taken consecutively. That is, you could take a day or two immediately after, and the rest of the time to attend calling hours, the funeral, etc.

Bereavement leave can be paid or unpaid; It will be up to the employer’s policy. If the company has an existing bereavement policy that offers fewer than 5 days of paid leave, the employee can receive pay for the number of days in the existing policy, but the rest might not be paid. If there leave isn’t paid, employees can use accrued paid leave to cover unpaid days.

Proof of death can be required within 30 days. Acceptable forms include a death certificate, obituary, or some other written proof of your loved one’s death, burial, or memorial services.  You’re entitled to expect confidentiality regarding these requests. Further, taking bereavement leave won’t adversely impact other types of protected work leave.

Similar to the California Family Rights Act (CFRA), it is against the law for an employer to refuse to hire, discharge, demote, fine, suspend, expel, or discriminate against an employee exercising their right to bereavement leave. They also can’t retaliate against an employee providing information or testimony about another person’s bereavement leave in any inquiry related to the employer’s possible violations of the law. Continue Reading ›

Much debate in recent years has centered on whether American workers in certain industries should be compelled to continue their reliance on tipped wages. There are roughly 5.5 million such workers, and their non-tipped wages often fall far below both the federal and state minimum wages. They may also be subject to tip pools. legal tipping pool California

As noted by the California Labor Commissioner’s Office, a “tip” is money left by a customer over the actual amount due for the services or goods they received. That money belongs to the worker(s) – not the employer.

Workers who rely on tipped wages are often (understandably) very protective of them. Tipping pools, which compel workers to share those tips with fellow employees, are not favored among tipped workers.

In California, tip pooling is legal as long as it is done in compliance with state and federal laws. However, there are specific rules and regulations regarding tip pooling that employers must follow in order to avoid violating workers’ rights.

Under California law, employers are allowed to require employees to participate in a tip pool, where tips are collected and distributed among employees who provide direct table service to customers. However, employers are not allowed to take any portion of the tips for themselves or use them for any purpose other than distributing them to eligible employees. Continue Reading ›

Non-compete clauses (also called California non-compete agreements) affect roughly 25 percent of the U.S. working population – but they aren’t enforceable in California. Meanwhile, they’re a major issue for workers throughout the rest of the country. But that could soon change. Los Angeles employment attorney

For those who may be unfamiliar, a non-compete clause is a type of employment contract that prohibits employees from accepting new job opportunities for a period of time after leaving the employer with whom they have the contract. They’re usually limited to similar lines of work and/or competing businesses within a certain geographic area.

While this is less of an issue for workers whose jobs are highly technical and well-paid, these same provisions can be very tough on lower-paid workers. One analysis showed that more than half of workers who sign non-compete clauses are non-salaried, hourly wage workers – about 15 percent of them earning less than $40,000 annually.

Non-compete clauses can also ban workers from:

  • Launching their own company in the same or similar industry.
  • Reaching out to former customers.
  • Using the skillsets you acquired on the job.
  • Publicly discussing whistleblower actions.
  • Revealing or making money from the employer’s trade secrets.

While some of these are more reasonable than others (ex-employees revealing trade secrets would be a problem for any employer), others risk stifling free markets.

Recently, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission proposed a new rule that would ban employers from imposing non-compete clauses on workers, calling the practice exploitative. If the rule goes into effect, it could potentially expand job opportunities for some 30 million Americans and increase wages by as much as $300 billion annually. Continue Reading ›

The surge in remote work arrangements had led to questions about the kinds of expenses for which California employers are responsible and which they aren’t. Los Angeles employment lawyer

The trend of remote work was already climbing before the pandemic hit, with 43 percent of workers saying they worked from home at least some of the time. According to the Pew Research Center, about 60 percent of workers say their jobs can be done from home all or most of the time. Most were already working from home before the pandemic. Currently, more than than half of workers who have a physical job site say they are choosing to work remotely.

Employers have become more open to telework where possible – not the least of which because it saves them all kinds of expenses. Not only are they saving on commercial real estate expenses, there’s increased productivity (fewer distractions and less tardiness and absenteeism), fewer workers’ compensation claims, broader talent pools to choose from, and higher employee retention rates.

But to what extent are employers required to cover in-home office expenses for remote employees? Continue Reading ›

Traveling nurses have long been relied upon to help fill gaps in healthcare demands. During the pandemic, traveling nurses were a life raft to hospitals who were swimming against the tide and trying to remain afloat. But now that the worst of the pandemic has subsided, we’re seeing a growing number of California labor law violations and contract breaches involving traveling nurse agencies and the hospitals that use them. Nurses say agencies have dangled carrots of huge sign-on bonuses, substantial hourly rates, and monthly living expense stipends – only to slash these payments mid-contract due to tapering demand.travel nurse pay disputes

Further complicating matters is the unique way these employment arrangements are structured: It’s the travel agency that’s technically the employer, but it’s the hospital that has control over the schedule, the assignments, the uniforms, the breaks, how the work must be done, etc. As our Los Angeles employment lawyers can explain, this level of control is the basis of some employment lawsuits by traveling nurses that seek to hold both the agency and the health care facility responsible.

Over the last year or so, we’ve seen a growing chorus of travel nurses alleging a “bait-and-switch” by the agencies that hire them. The agencies say they have no control over employment demands at hospitals, and have no choice but to cut hours if the need for nurses declines during a contract. Hospitals, citing their lack of a direct contract with nurses, say they shouldn’t be a part of any employment disputes.

Our Los Angeles employment lawyers have seen a few cases coming down the pipeline – in California, as well as other states, and so far, it seems that in disputes among these nurses, staffing agencies, and hospitals, rulings have leaned in favor of the nurses.

For example, last summer, the California Supreme Court ruled in an employment lawsuit of Grande v. Eisenhower Medical Center that a hospital and a nurse staffing agency had no privity between them. We wrote about this case several months ago on our California employment lawyer blog. Privity is when two or more parties in contract with each other are bound by that contract and obligated to each other in some way. A lack of privity in employment litigation means that two entities can be considered separate employers of the same worker. In the Grande case, the nurse settled her employment lawsuit against the staffing agency, but thanks to the state high court ruling, she was also free to pursue additional remedy directly against the hospital. Although her contract technically was with the staffing agency, the hospital maintained control over shift assignments and required nurses to use its own time and attendance system. The hospital argued it should be precluded from litigation because of its contract with the staffing agency. But the California Supreme Court ruled there was no privity because the staffing agency and the hospital had two different legal interests. Continue Reading ›

Workers who have been shorted wages, break time, or other benefits can pursue claims for damages in two ways: An administrative process through the California Labor Commissioner’s Office and/or with a civil lawsuit. With both avenues, there are time limits on how long workers have to file these claims. California wage theft

The deadlines are called statutes of limitations, and they apply for just about every type of case and claim under the sun. For employment wage and hour or breach of contract claims, deadlines are typically somewhere between two and four years, depending on the type of claim. There may be a few narrow exceptions that allow for more time to file, but courts are generally inclined to stick to the hard stops.

If you have a strong suspicion that you’ve been cheated out of fair pay and other compensation, it’s important to discuss your legal options with an experienced Los Angeles employment lawyer.

What is a Wage and Hour Claim?

When our legal team talks about “wage and hour” claims or lawsuits, it’s terminology that’s sort of a catch-all for many different kinds of employer misdeeds or oversights that result in employees not being properly compensated for their time and labor. California wage and hour claims can refer to:

  • Not paying workers minimum wage. (This has been an especially outsized problem for industries/companies that pay workers by-the-piece or the “piece rate” rather than an hourly wage.)
  • Not properly and fully compensating workers for overtime.
  • Denying workers the meal and rest breaks to which they are entitled.
  • Failure to reimburse workers for business expenses (gas/mileage, office supplies, work tools/materials, etc.).
  • Not properly maintaining worker pay records.
  • Bouncing worker paychecks.
  • Failure to pay workers their last paycheck.
  • Unauthorized deductions, including skimming workers’ tips.
  • Requiring workers to engage in work-related tasks without pay. This includes being on-call (call back or standby), off-the-clock bag checks every shift, refusing to pay workers for “unproductive time” (time spent at work/under the control of the employer, though not actively engaged in production work), and encouraging employees to work off-the-clock.
  • Not providing hazard pay, when it’s provided as part of the employment agreement.

Most of these rights are limited to workers properly classified as “employees” as opposed to “independent contractors.” Knowing that employees have far more rights under the law than independent contractors, some employers intentionally misclassify employees as independent contractors. This allows them to avoid paying for things like minimum wage, sick leave, workers’ compensation, meal breaks, etc. Workers can successfully challenge a misclassification as an independent contractor in court by establishing the level of control the operation had over the worker’s day-to-day tasks, how closely related the worker’s contributions were to the employer’s core mission, and how the worker was paid.

Workers who are properly classified as independent contractors can still pursue wage theft claims, though they typically do so by alleging breach of contract or unfair competition rather than labor law violations.

California Employment Law Statute of Limitations

Continue Reading ›

Two new employment laws in California went into effect Jan. 1, 2023 – one expanding worker protections when a loved one dies, and another expanding existing sick leave laws when caring for a loved one outside of their immediate family circle.California employment law

As our Los Angeles employment lawyers can explain, California has some of the strongest worker rights protections in the country – and these two new statutes are good examples.

Let’s start with Bereavement Leave – or more specifically, Assembly Bill 1949. This is a measure amending the California’s Healthy Workplaces Healthy Families Act to allow workers to take paid bereavement leave, also known as funeral leave or grievance leave.

New California Bereavement Leave Law for Employees

A fair amount of employers in California already offer some type of bereavement leave to their workers as part of their benefits package. Most have a set number of workdays that employees can take off if a loved one dies. Some require that workers first exhaust all their vacation and/or sick days first before they can be permitted to take any additional days for bereavement. Additionally, there are a number of cities throughout the state that require employers operating in those jurisdictions to provide workers with bereavement leave. But these policies are a patchwork of rules, with broad variations on how many days off are permitted, how close in relation the worker must be to the decedent for the worker to claim benefits, how the time must be taken (consecutively, broken up, etc.), and how requests must be made. Smaller employers may not have a set bereavement policy, but rather make determinations on a case-by-case basis.

This new law requires private employers with five (5) or more employees to provide any eligible employees (having worked there at least 30 days) to at least 5 days of bereavement leave upon the death of a family member. Some companies already offer more than this, but any employer who offers fewer days than this will need to amend their policies.

“Family member” in this case can mean: Continue Reading ›

Federal and state laws prohibit California pay discrimination, which is a workplace disparity in pay based on an employee’s gender, race, color, religion, age, disability, and national origin. Plaintiffs in California pay discrimination lawsuits do not need to prove there was discriminatory intent. In other words, it doesn’t matter if the employer didn’t mean to be discriminatory; the impact is what matters. equal pay discrimination

Pay discrimination claims in California are primarily based on one of a few laws:

  • The California Equal Pay Act, Labor Code section 1197.5. This state law has been in place for decades, and aims to ensure equal pay regardless of race or gender. In 2016, lawmakers expanded these protections to workers who do “substantially similar work.” It also eliminated the requirement that comparative workers be operating in the same establishment. The law also explicitly states retaliation against employees who seek enforcement of the law is illegal, as is punishing workers for discussing or asking about co-workers’ wages.
  • The Equal Pay Act of 1963. This federal statute requires employers to compensate men and women equally for doing the same work at the same workplace.
  • The California Fair Employment and Housing Act. FEHA prohibits discrimination of applicants and employees of companies with 5 or more employees. Pay discrepancies based on gender in violation of FEHA.

As our Los Angeles employment lawyers can explain, these statutes cover all forms of pay, including salary, overtime, bonuses, vacation/sick leave, insurance, and other benefits.

California Equal Pay Lawsuits Underscore Persistent Problems

The fight for equal pay isn’t a new one, but companies continue to violate the law. The tech industry has become quite notorious for persistent equal pay problems. In a survey conducted by Bloomberg last year, male employees received higher pay than 59 percent of women for the same work. The average disparity in pay was about 3 percent. That can amount to thousands of dollars per year for every employee. Continue Reading ›

A novel California law that empowers an unelected council to set both wages and working conditions at fast food restaurants is facing fierce opposition from wealthy business and restaurant lobbyists. State labor unions want to protect the law, which they say is the most significant win for organized labor in decades. fast food worker rights

The blowback is primarily coming from national business groups – including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce – which are seeking not only to see the law overturned in California, but to block similar movements in other states.

As our Los Angeles employment lawyers can explain, California has positioned itself as a leader in labor rights, particularly over the last few years. Lawmakers here have enacted one worker protection measure after another, and other state union and worker lobbyists have been closely watching these developments, analyzing which may work in their own regions. Political analysts are predicting these measures could soon take root in other states, particularly those majority-controlled by Democrats.

Per the U.S. Department of Labor explains that fast food workers are entitled to:

  • Minimum wage.
  • Overtime protections under the FLSA.
  • Food credits (employers can take credit for food provided at cost, but cannot take credit for discounts given to employees on food menu prices).
  • Special protections if they are minors. Those ages 14-15 can’t work more than 3 hours in a day or 18 hours in a school week. They can’t start work before 7 a.m. or clock out after 7 p.m. They are limited in the types of jobs they can do. Those who are 16 or 17 cannot perform hazardous jobs (primarily in fast food involves meat processing machines, commercial mixers, power-driven bakery machines, but also includes assignments for time-sensitive deliveries). ‘

California’s new law takes these benefits a step further.

Sweeping Protections for California Fast Food Workers

Historically, employees in the fast food industry have been sorely lacking in workplace protections. One recent Harvard study found that California fast food industry workers are on average paid $3 less per hour than workers in similar sector jobs in the state. Further, because of the somewhat unpredictable nature of the industry, many workers involuntarily get part-time schedules.

The Fast Food Accountability and Standards Recovery Act (also known as the FAST Recovery Act), was signed by California Governor Gavin Newsom on Labor Day. Sponsors of the law say the goal is to set certain baseline standards for the treatment of fast food workers – about 500,000 in this state alone, many of them women and people of color. These include certain health and safety rules, minimum wage regulations, and enforcement of employer violations. Continue Reading ›

Contact Information