martindale.com
Legal Library
|
Fisher & Phillips LLP Irvine, CA Document Search Results (12) Show: results per page Sort by:  | Good News, Bad News: Appeals Court Clarifies Penalties For Violations Of Wage Orders
Jimmie Johnson; Fisher & Phillips LLP;
Legal Alert/Article April 5, 2012, previously published on April 2012 The California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, handed employers a mixed blessing in a recent case, holding that employees cannot make a Private Attorneys General Action (PAGA) claim based upon alleged violations of Industrial Wage Commission (IWC) Wage Orders. Rather, PAGA claims can...
| | Sue An Employee, But Pay For Attorneys' Fees?
Jimmie Johnson, John K. Skousen; Fisher & Phillips LLP;
Legal Alert/Article January 5, 2012, previously published on January 2012 Employers defending wage claims in proceedings before the California Labor Commissioner are not permitted to file complaints or cross-claims against their employees, but that's not the case when a complaint is filed in civil court. Employers faced with complaints from employees seeking unpaid wages...
| | Court Finds Meal And Rest Period Rules Preempted For Some Employers
Ryan D. Wheeler; Fisher & Phillips LLP;
Legal Alert/Article January 5, 2012, previously published on January 2012 California law mandates that employers provide employees who work more than five hours with a 30-minute meal break prior to the sixth hour of work, and a second 30-minute meal period for employees who work more than 10 hours. Employees are also entitled to a 10-minute rest period for every four...
| | Are Pharmaceutical Sales Reps Exempt As "Outside Salesmen"? Diagnosis Unclear
Grace Horoupian, Matthew Sgnilek; Fisher & Phillips LLP;
Legal Alert/Article November 3, 2011, previously published on November 2011 Just last August, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit issued a ruling that sent shock waves through segments of the healthcare industry. Then, as affected employers began responding to that decision, the 9th Circuit reached an apparently contradictory decision that may have raised more...
| | A Down Economy - An Increase In Hiring Dangers
Grace Horoupian, Matthew Sgnilek; Fisher & Phillips LLP;
Legal Alert/Article November 3, 2011, previously published on November 2011 With the unemployment rate in the United States continuing to flirt with record highs, employers are faced with a swell of job applicants and a larger pool of qualified candidates for open positions. The glut of applicants in comparison with the dearth of jobs has left many hardworking and...
| | Employers Can Discriminate!
Grace Horoupian, Matthew Sgnilek; Fisher & Phillips LLP;
Legal Alert/Article October 5, 2011, previously published on October 2011 For some employees who can't figure out why they are not getting that promotion, the answer could be as simple as looking in the mirror. Grooming and personal appearance are playing an ever-increasing role in workplace raise and promotion decisions.
| | How Do You Recapture Debt From An Employee's Final Paycheck? Very Carefully
John K. Skousen; Fisher & Phillips LLP;
Legal Alert/Article October 5, 2011, previously published on October 2011 Employers continue to be challenged with claims from terminated employees who received payroll deductions for debts they owed the employer. In a recent case employees brought a collective action in a California federal court seeking remedies for violations of California law and the federal Fair...
| | Appeals Court To Employee: "You're Kidding Us, Right?"
Michael J. Rossiter; Fisher & Phillips LLP;
Legal Alert/Article October 5, 2011, previously published on October 2011 California's Sixth Appellate District recently issued a decision upholding an employer's right to modify the compensation terms of an at-will employment agreement where the employee never made a written protest to the modification and the employee continued to accept the modified compensation...
| | Give Employees A Break (Actually, Two of Them)
James J. McDonald; Fisher & Phillips LLP;
Legal Alert/Article August 12, 2011, previously published on August 2011 California Law requires that employees who work more than five hours in a day be provided an unpaid, off-duty meal period of at least 30 minutes, and a second meal period of they work more than ten hours. An employer that fails to provide these meal breaks must pay a premium of one hour of pay to...
| | Court Rules On Premium Payments For Denied Meal And Rest Periods
Colin Patrick Calvert; Fisher & Phillips LLP;
Legal Alert/Article July 6, 2011, previously published on July 2011 California law regulates meal and rest periods, requiring employers to provide their employees an unpaid 30-minute meal period after working for five hours, and a second meal period after 10 hours, with a 10-minute rest period for each four hours of work or major fraction thereof. Employees...
|
|