Federal Court Issues Favorable Decision for Employers on Meal Breaks
Another federal district court has weighed in on the ongoing debate in California regarding what it means to "provide" employees with meal breaks under California law.
Robin E. Weideman to Speak at Seminar Regarding Meal and Rest Break Class Actions and the Steps a Company Can Take to Ensure it is Not the Next Defendant
On October 16, 2007, Robin E. Weideman of the firm's Sacramento office will conduct a seminar for the Sacramento Area Human Resource Association, and will explain the latest meal and rest break class action trends, the implications of the recent...
DLSE Holds First of Two Public Meetings
Posted by Jennifer D. Barrera On August 2, 2007, California's newly-appointed Labor Commissioner, Angela Bradstreet, held a public hearing to obtain comments regarding meal and rest break laws and regulations in California. This public hearing was sparked by recent court...
United States District Court Ruling Could Help Limit Employer Liability for Missed Meal Periods
Posted by Robin E. Weideman Employers have reason to hope that their liability for missed meal periods may be less than some first thought when the California Supreme Court issued its much-publicized ruling in Murphy v. Kenneth Cole Productions, Inc....
California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement Issues New Wage and Hour Guidelines
The California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (“DLSE”) is the regulatory agency that enforces California’s wage and hour laws. The DLSE’s enforcement positions are available online in its “Division of Labor Standards Enforcement Polices and Interpretations Manual.” (click here to...
California Supreme Court's Ruling in Murphy v. Kenneth Cole
Earlier this week, the California Supreme Court issued its long awaited ruling in Murphy v. Kenneth Cole, deciding that fines arising from meal and rest break violations in California constitute "wages," for which there is a three-year statute of limitations,...
Oral Arguments Set In Murphy v. Kenneth Cole
The California Supreme Court has set oral arguments in Murphy v. Kenneth Cole Productions to take place on Wednesday, March 7, 2007, at 1:30 p.m., in San Francisco. The Supreme Court's ruling will (hopefully) settle the issue about whether Labor...
Marie DiSante Participated In A Roundtable Discussion On Recent Employment Cases & Their Impact On The Law - Article Appeared In The August 2006 Issue Of California Lawyer
Marie D. DiSante, founding partner of Carlton DiSante & Freudenberger LLP, recently participated in a roundtable discussion on several employment cases and their impact on the law. This roundtable appeared in the August 2006 issue of the California Lawyer. Roundtable...
Employment Law Cases Being Reviewed by the California Supreme Court
Posted by Brandy Thompson Cody STAY TUNED: The California Supreme Court is currently reviewing cases involving the following issues: Murphy v. Kenneth Cole. The issue the Supreme Court will review is whether the one hour premium pay for violation of...
California Supreme Court Grants Review For Two More Meal and Rest Break Cases
The California Supreme Court granted review of National Steel and Mills (see below). Click here or here to read prior posts regarding how California courts are ruling on the issue about whether Labor Code § 226.7 penalties for meal...
The California Supreme Court granted review of Murphy v. Kenneth Cole Productions
The Court's granting of review was likely given the conflicting lower court holdings on whether Labor Code § 226.7 penalties for meal and rest break violations are subject to a three year or a one year statute of limitations. [Click...
Update: Second Appellate District Holds Meal and Rest Break Payments are a Penalty
On January 27, 2006, the Second Appellate District issued a holding that the payments required under Labor Code section 226.7 are penalties and, therefore, a one year statute of limitations governs the payments, as opposed to a three year...
California Courts Split on Meal and Rest Break Interpretation
California law currently requires employers to pay a penalty, measured in the amount of one hour's wages, to any employee who is denied a mandatory meal or rest break. The confusing language of the statute itself (codified at Labor Code...
California Jury Grants $115 Million Award Against Wal-Mart for Punitive Damages
In December 2005, a jury in Alameda County awarded 116,000 Wal-Mart workers $115 million in punitive damages and $57 million in compensatory damages. The workers alleged that they were denied meal breaks. Click here to view the actual jury...
Considerations When Using Telecommuting As An Alternative To Time Off
Telecommuting: A Growing Phenomenon While most employees travel to their employer's facilities to work, evolving information technologies are enabling more and more people to work effectively from home. With proper equipment, many functions associated with sales and service positions can...
Refine Search