Category Archives: Uncategorized

California Legislators Take Another Stab At Preventing Employment Arbitration Agreements

By Sonya Goodwin & Emily Burkhardt Vicente on April 3, 2019

California has long been considered one of the most – if not the most – protective states of employee rights.  This continues to ring true, as the legislature has proposed another law aimed at prohibiting employers from requiring employees to sign mandatory arbitration agreements as a condition of employment.   In essence, Assembly Bill 51 (AB 51), would prevent employers from requiring their employees to bring all employment related claims, including discrimination, harassment, retaliation, and wage and hour claims, in arbitration instead of state or federal court.

If passed, AB 51 also would prohibit employers from threatening, retaliating against, discriminating against, or terminating an employee or refusing to hire a prospective employee who refuses to sign an arbitration agreement.  While the law does provide that employees may voluntarily consent to enter into an arbitration agreement, arbitration agreements with “opt-out” provisions or any provision that requires the employee to take affirmative action to avoid waiving his/her right to civil court would also be prohibited under AB 51.   If passed, any violation of this law would constitute an unlawful employment practice under the Fair Employment and Housing Act.   The proposed bill also allows for injunctive relief and attorneys’ fees to a prevailing plaintiff.

Read the rest at Hunton Employment & Labor Perspectives

The Trade Dress Issues Raised By Puma “Drive Thru” Shoes

by Gerald Sauer

When could a row of palm trees result in a legal dispute? When they appear on the shoelaces of a new line of sneakers that aims to capture the laid-backCalifornia coastal vibe.Footwear giant Puma North America Inc. recently introduced a $120 red, yellow and white sneaker dubbed the “Cali-0 Drive Thru” shoe. On its website, Puma describes the shoe as inspired by the essence of the California lifestyle: “The Cali Drive Thru pays homage to this classic style and an essential part of the Cali lifestyle: its burger diners.”

Read full story on Law360

GrubHub reclassification should be easy as ABC

Although Dynamex retroactivity is not guaranteed, the likelihood that an exception would be granted is about the same as winning the lottery.

by Gerald Sauer

Timing is everything. When a California district court ruled last February against GrubHub driver Raef Lawson’s contention that he and other drivers were misclassified as independent contractors, the state Supreme Court was two months away from issuing its landmark ruling in Dynamex Operations West Inc. v. Superior Court (April 30, 2018).

Lawson was thus deprived of the right to seek minimum wage, expense reimbursements and overtime to which he would have been entitled as an employee. With his request for remand denied on appeal, he sought reconsideration, asking the court to issue an indicative ruling or “at the very least state that the application of Dynamex in this case raises a substantial issue.”

Read more at DailyJournal.com (subscription required)