Our colleague Michael Kun, attorney at Epstein Becker Green, has a post on the Wage & Hour Defense Blog that will be of interest to many of our readers in the retail industry: “Clarification of California’s Obscure 'Suitable Seating' Wage Rule Likely to Lead to More Employers Providing Seats – and to More Class Actions Against Those Who Don’t."
Following is an excerpt:
The Court explained, “There is no principled reason for denying an employee a seat when he spends a substantial part of his workday at a single location performing tasks that could reasonably be done while ...
Our colleague Michael Kun, attorney at Epstein Becker Green, has a post on the Wage & Hour Defense Blog that will be of interest to many of our readers in the hospitality industry: “Clarification of California’s Obscure 'Suitable Seating' Wage Rule Likely to Lead to More Employers Providing Seats – and to More Class Actions Against Those Who Don’t."
Following is an excerpt:
The Court explained, “There is no principled reason for denying an employee a seat when he spends a substantial part of his workday at a single location performing tasks that could reasonably be done ...
We have written previously about California’s obscure wage rule pertaining to “suitable seating,” which requires that some employers provide some employees with “suitable seating” in some circumstances if the “nature of the work reasonably permits it” – and exposes employers to significant penalties if they do not do so.
Faced with a dearth of guidance on the obscure rule and with a wave of class actions following the discovery of the rule by the plaintiffs’ bar, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals threw up its hands last year and asked the California Supreme Court ...
By Michael Kun
We have written several times in this blog about California’s unusual – and unusually vague – “suitable seating” law, which requires some employers to provide some employees with suitable seating if the nature of their work reasonably permits it. The previously obscure law has become the subject of numerous class actions in California. And parties and the courts have struggled to interpret a vague law that has little legislative history and even less interpretive case law.
As we wrote most recently in January, the Ninth Circuit essentially threw up its hands ...
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 Michael Kun
As we have written before in this space, the latest wave of class actions in California is one alleging that employers have not complied with obscure requirements requiring the provision of “suitable seating” to employees – and that employees are entitled to significant penalties as a result.
The “suitable seating” provisions are buried so deep in Wage Orders that most plaintiffs’ attorneys were not even aware of them until recently. Importantly, they do not require all employers to provide seats to all employees. Instead, they provide that employers ...
Jeff Landes, Bill Milani, Susan Gross Sholinsky, Dean Silverberg, Anna Cohen, and Jennifer Goldman have prepared an Act Now Advisory on the amendment to Section 193 of New York’s Labor Law, which is scheduled to take effect on Nov. 6, 2012. The amendment expands the list of employee wage deductions that New York employers may lawfully make, so long as the employee authorizes such deductions.
* * * *
If you have questions, please reach out to the author(s).
The Workforce Bulletin blog is currently edited by Adam S. Forman, Greta Ravitsky, Elizabeth S. Torkelsen, and Jennifer Stefanick Barna.
By Kara Maciel and Casey Cosentino
The restaurant and hospitality industries are no strangers to the tidal wave of wage and hour class action lawsuits. Restaurants and hotel operators located in states with employee-friendly laws like Massachusetts, New York, and California, are particularly vulnerable. This vulnerability was recently confirmed on April 30, 2012, when Texas Roadhouse, Inc. agreed to pay $5 million to settle a putative class action suit filed by wait staff employees from nine restaurants in Massachusetts.
In Crenshaw, et. al, v. Texas Roadhouse, Inc. (No ...
On November 16, 2011, the New Jersey Appellate Division held that registered nurses are exempt from overtime compensation under the New Jersey Wage and Hour Law (“NJWHL”), N.J.S.A. 34:11-56a1 to 56a30, even if paid on an hourly basis, because they fall within the “professional” exemption. Anderson v. Phoenix Health Care, Inc., A-2607-10T2 (N.J. App. Div. Nov. 16, 2011). The Court further held that, even if registered nurses were not exempt, a claim for overtime compensation may nevertheless fail under the NJWHL’s good faith exception, N.J.S.A.
Recent Updates
- Watch: Change Is Coming from the EEOC—but When? - Employment Law This Week
- The EEOC Moves to End EEO Reporting – Comments Invited Through August 24
- Watch: New York Employers Face New Restrictions on Severance, Tuition Repayment, and Sick Time - Employment Law This Week
- Attention Connecticut Warehouse Employers: Deadline for New Quota Notices Approaching
- New Jersey Department of Labor’s Guidance Clarifies Expanded Job Protected Leave Rights for Employees