Earlier this month, the California Court of Appeal held in Thai v. International Business Machines (IBM) Corp. that even when governmental health and safety orders made working from home mandatory during the COVID-19 pandemic, employers may still be liable for necessary business expenses employees incurred while being required to work from home under California Labor Code section 2802.
On Monday, July 10, 2023, a California federal judge certified a statewide class of O’Reilly Auto Enterprises LLC hourly workers over allegations that O’Reilly violated California wage statement laws. However, the judge declined to certify three other classes relating to claims that O’Reilly failed to provide lawful meal breaks.
Every once in a while, a California court will issue a decision that is unexpected or, at least somewhat surprising. The California Supreme Court did just that in a recent decision titled Kuciemba v. Victory Woodworks, Inc., in which the Court ruled that employers do not have a duty to protect their employees’ household members from contracting COVID-19.
On Tuesday, June 27, former employees of cannabis dispensary chain MMD Inc. requested the Los Angeles County Superior Court to grant class certification in their lawsuit for failure to properly pay overtime wages, provide meal and rest breaks, and reimburse for necessary business expenses.
It isn’t every day that a state court overturns a decision by the United States Supreme Court. But it isn’t unheard of either. And that is exactly what happened on Monday, July 17 when the California Supreme Court issued its decision in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. The Adolph decision comes as a direct response to a decision issued by the United States Supreme Court in Viking River v. Moriana last year.
In April of this year, a California Court of Appeal provided guidance for healthcare employers who had or continue to have vaccination mandates. In Hodges v. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, the Court of Appeal ruled that a hospital’s decision to terminate an employee for failing to comply with its flu vaccination mandate did not violate California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act prohibition on disability discrimination.
The Walt Disney Company has been accused of systematically underpaying its female employees in California in a lawsuit that alleges that female employees earned $150 million less than their male counterparts over an eight-year period.
Home Depot, one of the largest home improvement retailers in the US, has agreed to pay $72.5 million to end a long-running class action lawsuit alleging that the retailer underpaid workers in California. The preliminary settlement was filed last Thursday in a San Francisco federal court.
Starbucks has been ordered to pay $25.6 million to former Starbucks regional director Shannon Phillips who sued the coffee giant for wrongful termination, claiming she was terminated for being white.
Tesla may face a class-action lawsuit after 240 black factory workers described racism and discrimination at Tesla’s San Francisco Bay Area plant, including the use of racial slurs and references to the manufacturing site as a plantation or slave ship. It is estimated that at least 6,000 workers could be part of the class.
