Main Menu

Articles Archive

  • 10.20.18

    Transgender workplace rights are a hot topic; while legislative bodies and courts continue to parse through these issues, one fact remains: the transgender individual is a person who has a right to work, to earn a living and to provide for himself/herself and for his/her loved ones.

  • 10.19.18

    Companies facing rapid growth may unwittingly set themselves up for legal problems down the road. Employers must review certain workplace policies when hiring a large number of employees in a short time, including non-compete agreements, employee handbooks and how to enforce the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) correctly.

  • 10.19.18

    In their bylined piece for mg Magazine titled “Workplace Drug Policies: What Can-A-Business Do?,” Danielle H. Moore and Nicole E. Stenoish discuss the evolving legal, societal and political changes surrounding cannabis that could create potential landmines for employers.

  • 10.18.18

    Autonomous vehicles have quickly moved from novelty items introduced by Silicon Valley tech companies to mainstream products under development by the traditional automakers.

  • 10.15.18

    In her bylined article for The Recorder titled “Pawternity Leave: Are Employers Barking Up the Wrong Tree With Pet-Based Leave?,” Los Angeles attorney Danielle Krauthamer examines the latest trend in employee leave: “pawternity” leave. Pawternity leave refers to paid time off for employees to transition to pet-owning responsibilities, to care for a sick pet, to grieve over a deceased animal, or even to participate in a pet adoption.

  • 10.12.18

    When an employee leaves the company, one of the final steps is to return all company-issued technology, like cell phones and laptop computers. While it may seem well within a leader’s job description to do a little snooping on the former employee, it’s really a violation of the Stored Communications Act.

  • 10.11.18

    In his bylined piece for QSR Magazine titled “Breaking Down the NLRB’s Proposed Overhaul to Joint Employment Rule,” Sacramento managing partner Alden J. Parker examines the National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB) proposed rule that would alter the definition of joint employment. As Alden says, the rule, if adopted, would make it “more difficult for businesses to be held legally responsible for alleged labor and employment law violations by staffing companies, franchisees, and other related organizations.”

  • 10.3.18

    While it’s difficult for leaders to take a thorough and honest assessment of a company’s work culture, the rise of the #MeToo movement has made it a priority.

  • 10.2.18

    Before year-end, the Department of Labor (DOL) is expected to issue revised tip pooling regulations that will acknowledge the validity of tip-pooling arrangements. The DOL will address arrangements that involve non-customarily tipped employees where no tip credit is taken and provide guidance as to who is deemed a “manager” or “supervisor” under recent FLSA amendments.

  • 10.1.18

    Employers and safety professionals need to know which particular law applies to the specific "working conditions" and hazards in order to be in compliance.

  • 10.1.18

    Opening a new restaurant can mean opening the door for potential labor and employment legal risks. In his bylined article for FSR Magazine, “Labor and Employment Guidelines for New Restaurants,” Corey Goerdt discusses the many challenges that arise when opening a new restaurant, including overtime compensation, employing minors and verifying the legal status of employees.

  • 9.28.18

    Title IX mandates that federally funded educational institutions cannot discriminate on the basis of gender. Denver attorney Darin Mackender authors a Law Week Colorado article on employment discrimination claims.

  • 9.26.18

    In a bylined article for HR Executive Magazine, Marty Heller builds the case for why he thinks we are on the brink of a dramatic shift in the rules that govern pay transparency compliance.

  • 9.24.18

    In her bylined piece for L.A. Biz titled “Here's a roadmap to navigating background check laws,” Anet Drapalski examines the California laws on background checks and offers some guidance for employers to navigate the nuanced laws. Anet covers topics including investigative consumer reports, criminal history, and credit reports, explaining what each means and what employers must do to satisfy requirements. 

  • 9.19.18

    In their bylined piece for SHRM titled “Should Employers Pick Up Slack?,” San Francisco Partner Collin D. Cook and Associate Caroline A. Pham look at the popular business-messaging application Slack and the potential workplace problems it may cause. Slack has changed how employees communicate, and Collin and Caroline state that it now presents “legal issues such as harassment and wage and hour concerns in new context.”

  • 9.14.18

    In their bylined piece for the San Diego Daily Transcript titled “No more #MeToo? 11 bills await Brown's signature,” San Diego Partner David Amaya and Associate Megan Walker examine the eleven sexual harassment-related bills that recently passed the California legislature and are currently awaiting action by Gov. Jerry Brown.

  • 9.14.18

    Sacramento attorney Katherine P. Sandberg, in her bylined article for The Recorder titled “SCOTUS Justices Feed Cake to Employers This Term,” looks at the Supreme Court’s recent decisions affecting employers. Katherine examines the Court’s decisions in Masterpiece Cakeshop, Encino Motorcars, Epic Systems, Digital Realty Trust and Janus and how each decision benefits employers.

  • 9.14.18

    Car dealers need to be aware that the “gig economy” has generated litigation regarding improper classification of independent contractors. In their authored article for Dealer Marketing Magazine, Houston attorneys Lariza Hebert and Stephen J. Roppolo discuss how, in certain circumstances, dealer-trade drivers may be independent contractors.

  • 9.13.18

    In a post-#MeToo world, it’s important for companies to reevaluate their workplace culture when it comes to sexual harassment and discrimination. In his bylined article for Commercial Appeal, Memphis attorney Rob Ratton outlines why policies alone are not enough to promote a zero-policy workplace.

  • 9.7.18

    Fisher Phillips partners Pamela Williams and Travis Vance explore a recent blockbuster decision by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, calling into question the validity of citations under the Mine Act, in their article for Rock Road Recycle.

  • 9.5.18

    Attorneys Rich Meneghello and Melissa Osipoff authored an article for Law360 to help attorneys understand New York’s new regulations for riding-sharing companies.

  • 8.31.18

    In his bylined article for the Puget Sound Business Journal titled “Get up to date on pay equity or risk lawsuits,” Seattle attorney Thomas V. Vogliano looks at the recent updates to the Washington Equal Pay Act. The new updates to the act make it easier for employees to sue or file a complaint with the state over unfair pay gaps and prohibit any gender-based discrimination in providing compensation.

  • 8.30.18

    In her bylined piece for the Daily Journal of Commerce Oregon titled “After the Levee Breaks: Unions in a Post-Janus World,” Portland associate Lisa Vickery discusses how the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Janus v. AFSCME, Council 31 impacts unions.

  • 8.24.18

    California Gov. Jerry Brown recently signed Assembly Bill 2282 into law, a follow-up measure to the state’s salary history ban that went into effect on Jan. 1, 2018. The new law defines key phrases and provides further guidance to California employers.

  • 8.24.18

    In their bylined article for Athletic Business titled “How to Prepare for Workplace Investigations,” Irvine partner Mark Jacobs and San Diego associate Adam Sloustcher address how employers in the sports industry can prepare for workplace harassment investigations.

  • 8.23.18

    On the final day of the Supreme Court’s 2017-2018 term, the court issued its long-awaited decision in Janus v. AFSCME, Council 31, changing the labor law landscape as we know it.

  • 8.22.18

    In September 2018, Ohio will become the latest state to allow the use and sale of medical marijuana. When the law goes into effect, employers will need to be prepared for changes in workplace policies, including pre-employment and random drug testing.

  • 8.15.18

    In their bylined piece for Beverage Master Magazine titled “As Easy As A, B, C: Does California’s New Independent Contractor Test Impact Your Brewery?,” San Diego Partner Amy Lessa and Associate Megan Walker break down the new three-part “ABC test” for determining whether a worker is classified as an employee or independent contractor

  • 8.14.18

    The opioid crisis has led to significant challenges for Americans, and employers are not immune. Some have noted the crisis as being one of the greatest challenges currently facing the country.

  • 8.10.18

    Does Greyhound have to let Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE) officials on their buses? Fisher Phillips attorney David Jones addressed that question with a bylined article in Law360.

  • 8.9.18

    In his bylined piece for Corporate Compliance Insights, Irvine Partner John Skousen breaks down the new ABC test for California employers, which determines whether a worker should be classified as an employee or an independent contractor. 

  • 8.6.18

    In the evolving landscape of workplace discrimination, the country’s awareness of sexual harassment continues to increase, and the courts continue to grapple with questions about the definition of sex discrimination.

  • 8.2.18

    Staffing agencies fill the demand for temporary workers. Rideshare companies use apps to match people needing a ride with people willing to give them a ride. Health care registries dispatch caregivers to clients’ homes. The burning question is: When does the matchmaker cross the line and become an employer of its “independent contractors”? Two recent documents issued by a federal agency and a state agency provide some insight into this question, at least from the administrative agency standpoint.

  • 8.1.18

    In her second article for Women Chefs and Restaurateurs, Wendy McGuire Coats continues her discussion on tackling implicit bias by exploring the role individual cultural programming plays in the formation of a person’s bias.

  • 7.31.18

    In an article for Rock Road Recycle, partners Pamela Williams and Travis Vance remind aggregate and heavy construction industry employers that 2017 OSHA 300A information was due July 1, 2018.

  • Writing for Construction News, Pamela Williams and Travis Vance advised construction industry professionals that 2017 OSHA injury and illness (300A) reports were due July 1, 2018

  • 7.19.18

    Stephen Scott’s article, “Answer to question about personal liability lies down a rabbit hole,” looks at federal and state laws and recent court decisions addressing personal liability for individual employers. 

  • 7.19.18

    Written by Wendy McGuire Coats, Todd Scherwin and Karl Lindegren, the article, “Encino: Deference challenged & ‘fair’ is back,” examines the U.S. Supreme Court’s rulings in Encino Motorcars v. Navarro and discusses what it means to put the word “fair” into FLSA exemption analysis.

  • 7.16.18

    In his bylined piece for Workforce Magazine, New Orleans Managing Partner Edward Harold outlines common mistakes that result in otherwise peaceful terminations going south in court, and provides step-by-step solutions to prevent the worst-case scenario from unfolding.

  • 7.13.18

    Katherine Sandberg of the Sacramento office authored the Building Savvy article “The State of Arbitration: Where We’re At, Where We’re Headed, and Where We Want To Go.” In this article, she weighs the pros and cons of arbitration for employers, and reviews the AB 3080 Bill.

  • 7.13.18

    In the article, "Employers Liable for Unpaid Wages in Colorado," published in Law Week Colorado, Denver Partner Susan Schaecher discusses the Colorado Court of Appeals case, Paradine v. Goei, which held that the Colorado Wage Claim Act does not categorically bar individual liability for unpaid wages.

  • 7.11.18

    Partner David Monks’ article, “The New ABCs of Worker Classification in California” was published in the Becker’s Hospital Review. This article explains the new three-part “ABC test,” a legal standard that determines whether a worker is classified as an employee or independent contractor.

  • 7.6.18

    In a blog post for Risk Management magazine, Melody Rayl recommends seven steps employers should take in their own workplaces to respond to the Supreme Court’s June 2018 travel ban decision

  • 6.28.18

    William Blackie and Sarah Moore authored the Crain’s Cleveland Business article “U.S. Supreme Court Strikes a Massive Blow Against the National Labor Movement.” This article discusses the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Janus v. AFSCME prohibiting public-sector employers from collecting “fair share” fees from non-union employees.

  • 6.28.18

    Writing for Construction News, Art Lambert points out that employers can be held liable for violence at or related to the workplace if it has failed to take steps to prevent or respond appropriately to workplace violence.

  • 6.27.18

    Andrew Hoag of the Los Angeles office authored The Recorder article “The 'Masterpiece Cakeshop' Ruling's Guidance to Employers.” In this article, Andrew provides an analysis on the U.S Supreme Court decision that ruled in favor of a baker who refused to make a cake for a same-sex couple.

  • 6.26.18

    New York Partner Melissa Osipoff authored the New York Law Journal article “Private Facebook Posts Could Be Fair Game For Discovery.”

  • 6.18.18

    Brett Owens of the Tampa office wrote the article “Time’s Up, Florida: Creating Workplaces Free from Sexual Harassment and Retaliation” for HR Florida Review.

  • 6.14.18

    Rob Ratton of the Memphis office authored the article “Guest Column: Despite DOJ, Court Rules Transgender Discrimination Violates Federal Law” featured in the Memphis Business Journal.

  • 6.11.18

    Earlier this year, Vermont legislators introduced House Bill 556, an outright ban on noncompetes and any other restrictive covenant that restrains an individual’s livelihood. This legislative overhaul of Vermont restrictive covenant law is one of several state-level reform efforts proposed in the wake of the White House’s 2016 “call to action” for state restrictive covenant reform. Indeed, since the call to action, over a dozen state legislatures from across the country have proposed and enacted legislation reforming employers’ use of restrictive covenants. As more and more states answer the “call” and alter an already inconsistent legal landscape, employers who use restrictive covenants should review their agreements to ensure compliance with the states’ laws in which they operate.

Back to Page