Posts from March 2010.

Last weekend President Obama made two recess appointments filling seats at the National Labor Relations Board. Union lawyers Craig Becker and Mark Pearce will fill two of the three vacant seats on the Board. Members Becker and Pearce were originally nominated as a package with a third, Republican, nominee for Senate consideration. Senate confirmation did not happen. No Republican received a recess ...

On March 25, 2010, we conducted our 11th Annual Employment Law Conference at the Cerritos Center for Performing Arts and the Cerritos Sheraton.

Today, in Bamonte v. City of Mesa, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the time police officers spend putting on and taking off their police uniforms and police gear is not compensable time under Federal law under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Portal-to-Portal Act because the City of Mesa did not require the officers to put on or take off their uniforms and gear at the workplace. The court explained ...

On March 23, 2010, in Mendoza v. ADP Screening and Selection Services, Inc., the California Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's decision to strike Mendoza's complaint alleging ADP violated various statutes by disclosing to a prospective employer the appearance of Mendoza's name on the Megan's Law Website maintained by the California Department of Justice. For example, Mendoza alleged ADP violated California Penal Code Section 290.46, which prohibits the use of information disclosed on the Megan's Law Website for purposes relating to, among other things, employment.

Robert R. Roginson, formerly Chief Counsel for the California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, has rejoined the firm as a partner in its Employer Services Department. Appointed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in October 2007, Mr. Roginson represented and advised the California Labor Commissioner and her staff in all aspects of enforcement and interpretation of California’s labor and wage and hour laws, licensing requirements, and retaliation statutes.

As we previously reported here, on February 8, 2010, the California Court of Appeal published its decision in Jaimez v. DAIOHS USA, Inc., a decision we think is wrongly decided in many ways and that might make it significantly easier for plaintiffs to obtain class certification in wage and hour cases.

As previously reported here, a recent report issued by the Judicial Council of California, Administrative Office of the Courts, Office of Court Research, shows that employment cases were the most frequently filed class actions, representing 29.3% of the class actions filed and that over half of the employment cases filed alleged violations of Labor Code provisions governing payment of wages, rest and meal ...

Today, in Alcazar, et al. v. The Corporation Of The Catholic Archbishop of Seattle, et al., the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that a Catholic seminarian's claims against his church for allegedly unpaid wages brought under a Washington state minimum wage statute is barred as a matter of law by the Free Exercise Clause and the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.

On March 2, 2010, in Rutti v. Lojack Corporation, Inc., ("Rutti II") the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals withdrew its previous decision at 578 F.3d 1084 (9th Cir. 2009) ("Rutti I") and revisited its holdings regarding the extent to which commuting time is compensable time, the extent to which work related activities before work begins is compensable time, and the extent to which work related activities after ...

Other AALRR Blogs

Recent Posts

Popular Categories

Contributors

Archives

Back to Page