|
|||||||||||||
When faced with submission of an inadequate certification for FMLA leave, what options does an employer have? In Lewis v. United States of America, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals provides guidance for employers faced with just such a situation.
California Appellate Courts Split Concerning What Qualifies as Same-Sex Sexual Harassment In Kelley v. The Conco Companies (2011) 196 Cal.App.4th 191, the First District splits with the Second District’s ruling in Singleton v. United States Gypsum Co. (2006) 140 Cal.App.4th 1547 concerning what qualifies as sexual harassment in the context of same-sex harassment suits. This split will likely require the California Supreme Court to intervene on the issue so employers can have clarity.
California Court of Appeals Continues to Favor Binding Arbitration Claims by Employers On June 8, 2011, in MacIntosh v. Powered, Inc., the Court of Appeal of California, First District, Division Five, reversed the trial court’s denial of Powered, Inc.’s motion to compel arbitration, forcing the plaintiff, John MacIntosh, a California-based employee of Powered, Inc., to arbitrate his claims in Texas.
U.S. Supreme Court Throws Out Wal-Mart Employment Class Action In a major victory for employers, the United States Supreme Court threw out the largest class action employment discrimination case in the nation's history. The suit, against Wal-Mart Stores, had sought to consolidate the claims of as many as 1.5 million women on the theory that the company had sexually discriminated against them in pay and promotion decisions.
California’s Overtime Laws Do Not Distinguish Between Residents and Nonresidents On June 30, 2011, in Sullivan v. Oracle Corporation, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled on the issue of whether California law applies to non-residents employees who work both in California and in other states involving a California-based employer. The Court concluded that the Labor Code’s overtime provisions apply to work performed in California by nonresident employees who work both here and in other states for a California-based employer. Claims that California-based employer violated Labor Code overtime provisions may serve as predicates for claims under California’s unfair competition law. Claims for overtime compensation under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, based on work performed for such employer in other states, however, cannot serve as predicates for UCL claims.
|
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
You received this email because you are a member of the Employment Newsletter distribution list. If at any point you no longer wish to receive this newsletter, please forward this email to marketing@mpplaw.com with "Unsubscribe" in the email subject line. Should you wish to add others to the distribution, please email their name, position, company and email address to marketing@mpplaw.com, and we will add them to the distribution list. MPP Employment Law Group ------------------------------------------------------- Disclaimer: This email is designed to provide information in regard to the subject matter and is made available with the understanding that the email does not constitute the rendering of legal advice or other professional services. If legal advice is required, such services should be sought. All rights reserved. Advertising ------------------------------------------------------- |
|||||||||||||
