A California plaintiff who prevails in a wage-hour lawsuit generally may recover his or her attorney’s fees. The same is so for employers -- but only for the next few months.
A new statute will take effect in January 2014 that will change whether and how an employer who prevails in such a case may recover its fees. In a state already overrun with wage-hour lawsuits with questionable merit, that new statute seems to ensure that even more meritless wage-hour lawsuits will be filed by plaintiffs’ counsel who count on the in terrorem effect of those lawsuits to force employers to settle such claims – and who pocket 40% of what they recover.
Governor Jerry Brown has signed into law a bill that raises the standard for a prevailing employer to recover fees when they prevail in wage-hour actions. Effective January 2014, an employer must meet a higher standard than an employee to recover fees. It must not only prevail in the lawsuit, but it must establish that the lawsuit was brought in “bad faith.”
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently took a significant step toward bringing uniformity to the law of class and collective action waivers under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).
In Sutherland v. Ernst & Young LLP, the court held that employees can be contractually compelled to arbitrate their claims on an individual basis, and thereby waive their right to participate in a FLSA collective action. The decision is another in a series of cases that have required employees to arbitrate employment-related claims on an individual basis ...
On July 2, 2013, in Mortgage Bankers Ass’n v. DOL, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia vacated a DOL Administrative Interpretation issued in 2010 which declared that Mortgage Loan Officers are not exempt from the FLSA overtime requirements.
Does this mean that employers can now covert their Mortgage Loan Officers to exempt, salaried, compensation plan? Not likely.
The Court of Appeals ruling vacated the DOL Administrative Interpretation on a technicality – the Court found that the DOL failed to provide the required public notice and ...
By: Dean Silverberg, Bill Milani, Jeffrey Landes, Susan Gross Sholinsky, Anna Cohen, and Jennifer Goldman
The New York State Department of Labor ("DOL") recently published its long-awaited proposed regulations ("Proposed Regulations") pertaining to the newly expanded categories of permissible wage deductions pursuant to the New York State Labor Law ("Labor Law"). As we previously reported (see the Act Now Advisory entitled "New York Labor Law Significantly Expands the Scope of Permissible Wage Deductions"), the amendments to Section 193 of the Labor Law ("Section 193 ...
By: Kara Maciel and Jordan Schwartz
As discussed in prior blogs, due to confusion surrounding FLSA tip pool requirements, the U.S. Department of Labor (“DOL”) Wage and Hour Division enacted a strict rule in 2011 related to proper tip pooling and service charge practices. This rule was met with swift legal challenges, and earlier this week the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon concluded that the DOL had exceeded its authority when implementing its final rule. See Oregon Rest. and Lodging Assn. v. Solis, No. 3:12-cv-01261 (D. Or. June 7, 2013).
Inconsistent ...
Recently, there have been a number of reports indicating that federal wage-hour lawsuits under the Fair Labor Standards Act increased by 10% in 2012, after smaller increases in the preceding years.
What about California, though?
While I am not aware of anyone who has compiled the figures to determine whether the number of California wage-hour cases has risen or fallen in the past year or so, from where I sit it certainly seems like there has been some decline in the number of wage-hour cases filed in California. And, if not, we can probably expect that in the years to come.
There are a ...
There has been a lack of clarity in California wage and hour law on how compensation must be structured to meet the “salary basis test,” particularly where an exempt employee is paid based on hours worked. However, in Negri v. Koning & Associates, the California Court of Appeal addressed this very issue and concluded that a compensation scheme based solely upon the number of hours worked, with no guaranteed minimum, is not considered a “salary” for the purpose of state overtime laws.
Under California law, an employee exempt from overtime laws must ...
We are pleased to announce the release of a new version of our Wage & Hour Guide app that puts federal and state wage-hour laws at employers’ fingertips. To download the app, click here.
The new version features an updated main screen design; added support for iOS 6, iPhone 5, iPad Mini, and fourth generation iPad; improved search capabilities; enhanced attorney profiles; expanded email functionality for sharing guide content with others; and easier access to additional wage and hour information on EBG’s website, including the Wage and Hour Division Investigation Checklist and ...
By Michael Kun
“Hybrid” wage-hour class actions are by no means a new concept.
In a “hybrid” class action, the named plaintiff files suit seeking to represent classes under both the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) and state wage-hour laws. As the potential recovery and limitations periods for these claims are often very different, so, too, are the mechanisms used for each.
In FLSA claims, where classes can be “conditionally certified” if a plaintiff satisfies a relatively low burden of establishing that class members are “similarly situated” – a ...
Blog Editors
Recent Updates
- Minimum Wages and Exemption Thresholds Adjusted Across the USA
- Demystifying Wage and Hour Audits - One-on-One Video with Courtney McFate
- Minimum Wage Increases Coming Soon Across the Nation – Especially in California
- Time Is Money: A Quick Wage-Hour Tip on . . . Successful Summer Internship Programs
- New York Enacts Amendment to Limit Frequency of Pay Damages for Manual Workers