Practical HR Tips, News & Advice. Updated Daily.
By Mark I. Schickman The legal status of gay marriage in California has been a rollercoaster ride. First, the California Supreme Court held that a ban on gay marriage was unconstitutional. Then California passed Proposition 8, writing a ban on gay marriage into the California Constitution — and the California Supreme Court bowed to that […]
All California employers should be familiar with the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), which prohibits employment discrimination and harassment. The FEHA offers employees greater protection and relief than its federal counterpart, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
In a long-awaited decision, the California Supreme Court has unanimously held that California-based employers must pay overtime to certain nonresident employees who spend time working full days or weeks in the state – and that the failure to do so can provide the basis for a claim under the state unfair competition law (Sullivan v. […]
The ringing in of the New Year brings with it new state and federal regulations, legislation, and court decisions that California employers need to be on top of. But what’s most pressing? What do you really need to act on rather than just monitor?
Workers’ Comp is celebrating its 100th year in California, but a lot of employers aren’t cheering; managing comp cases is still a hassle. An upcoming webinar will help with one of the most vexing challenges: how to terminate an employee who is out on workers’ comp leave.
As every California employer knows, our state’s employment laws are unique. One unique feature is the KinCare law — which permits employees to use some of their accrued paid sick leave to care for ill family members. Sick leave that is used by an employee under the KinCare law cannot be counted against the employee […]
In 2005, the California Supreme Court ruled that, under state law, individual managers and corporate officers couldn’t be held personally liable for unpaid wage claims. In other words, only the company could be forced to pay back wages. This was an important victory for California employers (Find out more on the 2005 case). But the […]
Already set to decide the troublesome meal period issue (whether employers must “ensure” or “provide” employee meal periods) in Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior Court and Brinkley v. Public Storage, Inc., the California Supreme Court has just agreed to review two other cases involving wage and hour issues.
In the January issue of California Employer Advisor, we reported on Brinkley v. Public Storage, Inc., which held that employers are required merely to provide employees with meal and rest periods, not ensure that employees actually take them (CEA online subscribers can read more on the case here).
When an employee with a discrimination beef voluntarily pursues an internal administrative remedy—such as a grievance or complaint procedure—prior to filing a discrimination complaint under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), does that extend the time the employee has to file a FEHA charge? The California Supreme Court, in a new case, says […]