Given the increasing mobility of the workforce, the issue of which state’s laws apply to a traveling employee is becoming more and more common. In Sullivan v. Oracle Corp., the California Supreme Court held that California-based employers must pay non-resident employees working in California according to the California’s overtime laws. That means that a
Court
Court Upholds Timekeeping Rounding Policies: See’s Candy Shops Inc. v. Superior Court
In See’s Candy Shops, Inc. v. Superior Court the court addressed whether an employer’s policy of rounding employee’s time clock entries to the nearest tenth of an hour. See’s Candy’s policy rounded employees’ time entries either up or down to the nearest tenth of an hour in its Kronos time keeping system. For example, if…
What is a Split Shift?
A split shift is defined in the California IWC Wage Orders as:
…a work schedule, which is interrupted by non-paid non-working periods established by the employer, other than bona fide rest or meal periods.
See Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 11040, subd. 2(Q). If the employee works two shifts separated by more than a…
Webinar: New Laws Facing California Employers In 2012
Governor Brown signed a number of new employment laws that take effect in January 2012. During this webinar, we will cover the new obligations facing employers under these recently enacted employment laws as well as the proper steps employers should take to comply with them. The discussion will also cover the recent oral argument…
California Supreme Court Likely to Issue Ruling in Brinker Restaurant v. Superior Court Soon
Today, the California Supreme Court set oral argument in Brinker Restaurant v. Superior Court (Hohnbaum) to take place on November 8, 2011. The Court typically provides a ruling on cases within 90 days of oral argument, so I expect a ruling very early in 2012.
This case is the much anticipated ruling on whether employers…
US Supreme Court Rules Title VII Anti-Retaliation Provision Applies To Statements Made During Investigations
Title VII prohibits employers from retaliating against employees who report workplace race or gender discrimination. The issue examined by the US Supreme Court in Crawford v. Metro Government of Nashville, was whether this protection extends to an employee who speaks out about discrimination not on her own initiative, but in answering questions during an…