By: Bailey K. Bifoss, Andrew M. Paley, and Michael Afar
Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Supreme Court held that a plaintiff whose individual PAGA claims are compelled to arbitration retains standing to pursue representative PAGA claims in court in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc., meaning that their claims may live on way past the first volley.
Wimbledon may be
Continue Reading California Takes the Match with Adolph RulingBy: Paul J. Leaf and Kyle Winnick
Seyfarth Synopsis: In Rocha v. U-Haul Co. of Cal., the California Court of Appeal held that a plaintiff asserting a PAGA claim does not have standing to pursue a PAGA claim on behalf of others, if an arbitrator denies the plaintiff’s individual claims on the merits and finds no underlying Labor Code
Continue Reading Adverse Adjudication on the Merits Deprives Plaintiffs of PAGA StandingBy: Sage Fishelman and Josh Rodine
Seyfarth Synopsis: A divided Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals panel has ruled that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) preempts California Assembly Bill 51 (AB 51), which purports to prohibit employers from requiring job applicants and workers from signing arbitration pacts. The panel further concluded that AB 51’s criminal penalties are preempted by the FAA.
Continue Reading Ninth Circuit Rehearing Suggests a FAArewell to California’s Arbitration Prohibition
Co-authored by Christopher Truxler and Coby Turner
Seyfarth Synopsis: Earlier this month, a California federal court dismissed the misclassification claims of 7-Eleven franchisees on the pleadings, finding they did not and could not plead facts sufficient to show that they were employees of their franchisor.
All is well with one of America’s most beloved convenience stores. In October 2017, four
Continue Reading Oh Thank Heaven, Franchisees Not Employees of 7-Eleven!
Co-authored by Kyle Petersen, John Giovannone, and Noah Finkel
Seyfarth Synopsis: By resurrecting reliance on the administrative/production dichotomy in FLSA administrative exemption cases, the Ninth Circuit is at odds with the California Supreme Court’s application of the state’s administrative exemption. California employers thus find themselves in a strange new world where the state construct is easier to understand
Continue Reading It’s a Strange New World in California for the Administrative Exemption
Co-authored by Noah Finkel, Colton Long, Kyle Petersen, and John Giovannone
Seyfarth Synopsis: FLSA cases holding against employers typically invoke a canon of construction that the FLSA should be construed broadly, and any of its exemptions narrowly. But a study of the roots of this language shows that the canon has a dubious foundation and that it
Continue Reading Can We Finally Retire the Notions of Construing The FLSA’s Overtime Provisions Broadly But Its Exemptions Narrowly?
Co-authored by John Giovannone, Kyle Petersen, and Noah Finkel
Seyfarth Synopsis: Earlier this month, the Ninth Circuit chose to side with the Second Circuit, and not the Sixth Circuit, to opine that mortgage underwriters fail to meet the FLSA’s administrative exemption from overtime test because underwriting duties “go to the heart of… marketplace offerings, not to the internal
Continue Reading Making A Mountain Of The Administrative/Production Dichotomy Molehill
Co-authored by Julie Yap and Michael Cross
Seyfarth Synopsis: The California Court of Appeal affirmed a denial of class certification on the ground that the plaintiff’s expert report failed to establish claims could be determined on common evidence. The ruling highlights that trial courts are permitted to weigh conflicting evidence related to whether common or individual issues predominate. While expert
Continue Reading Battle of the Experts on Class Certification: A Win for Employers
Authored by Rachel M. Hoffer
It’s a common business model in the fast-food industry: a massive restaurant company provides the menu, the marketing—including catchy slogans and a universally recognized logo—and the basic operational standards for the restaurant,
and a franchisee provides the rest—including hiring, training, and firing restaurant employees. Unfortunately for the fast-food giants (the notorious FFGs, if you will)
Authored by
Seyfarth Synopsis: In what many employers will see as a “break” from workplace reality, the Supreme Court, in Augustus v. ABM Security Services, Inc., announced that certain “on call” rest periods do not comply with the California Labor Code and Wage Orders. As previously reported on our California Peculiarities Employment Law Blog,
Continue Reading No Break for California Employers This Holiday Season