• Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Disclaimer
  • Contact Us
AshiLegal

(213) 260-3856

info@ashilegal.com

  • About Us
  • Services
  • How We Work
  • Fees
  • California Employment Law Updates

Author: Ashish Gautam

Supreme Court permits state wide discovery of employee’s contact information in PAGA Representative Actions

Posted on July 23, 2017November 23, 2017 by Ashish Gautam Posted in Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA)

Williams v. Superior Court (2017) 3 Cal. 5th 531, 220 Cal.Rptr.3d 472 In the course of discovery of a PAGA representative action, Plaintiff Michael Williams sought contact information for fellow California employees. Employer opposed and Plaintiff moved for a motion […]

Read More

Supreme Court says “no” to on-call rest periods.

Posted on January 17, 2017November 23, 2017 by Ashish Gautam Posted in Class Action, Rest Periods

Augustus v. ABM Sec. Servs., Inc. (2016) 2 Cal. 5th 257, 211 Cal.Rptr.3d 634. ABM employs thousands of security guards at residential, retail, office, and industrial sites throughout California. Plaintiff Jennifer Augustus filed a putative class action on behalf of […]

Read More

$15 Million settlement in only PAGA action for suitable seating.

Posted on November 13, 2016November 23, 2017 by Ashish Gautam Posted in Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA)

Following the Supreme Court’s decision in Kilby v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc. (2016) 63 Cal.4th 1, 201 Cal.Rptr.3d 1 superior court approved a $15 million settlement in Garrett v. Bank of America, which alleged that California bank tellers should have been […]

Read More

An employer is only liable to pay a premium for “overtime work” as defined in CBA and not Section 510

Posted on February 24, 2014February 25, 2014 by Ashish Gautam Posted in Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA), Hours Worked, Minimum Wages, Overtime, Unpaid Wages Tagged CBA, overtime

Vranish v. Exxon Mobil Corporation (2014) 223 Cal.App.4th 103, 166 Cal.Rptr.3d 845 Plaintiffs were represented by a labor organization and their employment governed by the terms of a collective bargaining agreement (CBA). As per the CBA, Plaintiffs were regularly scheduled […]

Read More

New Amended Section 218.5 restricts recovery for attorney fees by prevailing employer only to claims brought in bad faith

Posted on February 24, 2014February 24, 2014 by Ashish Gautam Posted in Attorney fees, Damages, Hours Worked, Meal Periods, Minimum Wages, Overtime, Rest Periods, Unpaid Wages

The California Supreme Court decision in Kirby v. Immoos Fire Protection, Inc. (2012) 53 Cal.4th 1244, 274 P.3d 1160 held that Section 218.5 is a two-way fee-shifting provision and does not apply to claims to recover additional wages for the […]

Read More

Newly Enacted Statutes and Approved Bills

Posted on February 24, 2014February 24, 2014 by Ashish Gautam Posted in Attorney fees, Damages, Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), Minimum Wages, Misclassification, Overtime, Personal Attendant, Recovery Period, Rest Periods, Sexual Harassment, Unpaid Wages, Vacation Pay

Revisions to California Minimum Wage (Assembly Bill No. 10) Gov. Jerry Brown signed a bill on Wednesday, Sept. 25, 2013 that would increase California Minimum Wage to $9 an hour effective July 1, 2014 and $10 an hour effective Jan. […]

Read More

No mitigation of damages of earnings from inferior job in wrongful termination damages

Posted on February 24, 2014February 25, 2014 by Ashish Gautam Posted in Damages, Discrimination based on National Origin, Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), Unpaid Wages, Wrongful Termination Tagged Damages, FEHA, Unpaid Wages, wrongful termination

Villacorta v. Cemex Cement, Inc. (2013) 221 Cal.App.4th 1425, 165 Cal.Rptr.3d 441 Plaintiff a mechanical engineer worked for the Defendant employer for 15 years in Philippines until he was transferred to Victorville’s plant in 2003. Facing bad economy, employer laid […]

Read More

Jury Award of $27,000 and Attorney Fees of $700,000 in a FEHA case approved by Ninth Circuit

Posted on February 24, 2014February 25, 2014 by Ashish Gautam Posted in Attorney fees, Damages, Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), Gender Discrimination, Retaliation Tagged Attorney fees, Damages, FEHA

Muniz v. United Parcel Service, Inc. (2013) 738 F.3d 214 Jury Award of $27,000 and Attorney Fees of $700,000 approved by Ninth Circuit in a FEHA case. Plaintiff sued Defendant employer alleging that her demotion was result of gender discrimination, […]

Read More

Federal Law Preempts State-Law Rule which prohibits waiver of a Berman Hearing Prior to Arbitration

Posted on February 24, 2014February 25, 2014 by Ashish Gautam Posted in Arbitration Tagged arbitration agreements, At&T decision, Berman hearing, Concepcion decision, preemption, Sonic II, Sonic II decision

Sonic-Calabasas A, Inc. v. Moreno (2013) 57 Cal.4th 1109, 311 P.3d 184 (Sonic II) The California Supreme Court in Sonic I held that it is contrary to public policy and unconscionable for an employer to require an employee, as a […]

Read More

An employee’s work may not be simultaneously “exempt” and “nonexempt”

Posted on February 24, 2014February 25, 2014 by Ashish Gautam Posted in Hours Worked, Meal Periods, Minimum Wages, Misclassification, Overtime, Rest Periods, Unpaid Wages Tagged minimum wages, Misclassification, overtime, Unpaid Wages

Heyen v. Safeway Inc. (2013) 216 Cal.App.4th 795, 157 Cal.Rptr.3d 280 Plaintiff/Respondent Linda Heyen, was an assistant manager for defendant’s store. After Defendant terminated Heyen, she claimed unpaid overtime pay, contending misclassification as an exempt employee even though most of […]

Read More

Posts navigation

Older posts

Recent Posts

  • Supreme Court permits state wide discovery of employee’s contact information in PAGA Representative Actions
  • Supreme Court says “no” to on-call rest periods.
  • $15 Million settlement in only PAGA action for suitable seating.
  • An employer is only liable to pay a premium for “overtime work” as defined in CBA and not Section 510
  • New Amended Section 218.5 restricts recovery for attorney fees by prevailing employer only to claims brought in bad faith

Editor

Ashi The blog maintained by AshiLegal has been provided for general informational purposes only and is not intended and should not be construed to constitute legal advice. Please consult an attorney to rely on or refrain from relying on any information provided on this website.

Tags

Anti-Wage-Theft arbitration agreements Attorney's fees Attorney fees Autozone Brinker decision California New Employment Laws 2012 church class certification Commission Agreements Concepcion decision Credit Check Credit Report Damages FEHA Gender Expression Gender Identity Genetic Discrimination Gentry decision Independent Contractor Insurance Agents Meal Periods Michelle Maykin Memorial Donation Protection Act minimum wages Misclassification non-profit non-resident employees in california Oracle Organ and Bone Marrow Donor Leave overtime PAGA preemption Pregnancy Leave religious associations religious exemption Rest Periods Section 558 section 1194 Sexual Harassment sick leave Thurman truck drivers Unpaid Wages waiver wrongful termination

Categories

Copyright 2017 AshiLegal. All rights reserved. Theme: Business Hub by Rigorous Themes.


Back To Top