By: While some employers are alleging that AB 1513 is unconstitutionally vague and an improper retroactive application of California rest break laws, at least two large farmers are contending that they were improperly excluded from using...
Publications
Court Denies Request for Stay of AB 1513
By: Posted: December 5, 2016 Please be advised the court in the Nisei Farmers League v. California Labor and Workforce Development Agency (State of California), the case pending in the superior court for the County of Fresno, issued its...
Is There Federal Preemption for California AB 1513 Claims Against California Trucking Companies for Rest and Recovery Breaks and Non-Productive Time?
By: and Tyler Kring AB 1513/Labor Code section 226.2 provides that companies who pay piece rate must pay for rest and recovery breaks and non-productive time separate and in addition to traditional piece rate wages. Trucking companies...
AB 1513 Due Diligence and Payment Procedures – Time to Comply is Running Out
By: Posted on November 8, 2016As many of you know, the deadline to make the AB 1513 payments is currently December 15, 2016, unless the Fresno Superior Court issues a stay on payments made per AB 1513 within the next week or two, which...
Paid-When-Paid Provisions and Effects on Subcontractors
By: Timothy J. BroussardPosted on October 3, 2016When a subcontractor is not paid on a project, it usually comes at the worst time. There is payroll and suppliers to be paid. Yet, the builder has failed to pay the subcontractor because the owner is in dispute with the...
Ninth Circuit Decides Against Class Action Waivers
By: and Tyler Kring Posted on September 1, 2016 On August 22, 2016, the Ninth Circuit joined the Seventh Circuit and the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) with their ruling in Morris v. Ernst & Young LLP regarding class action...
Who Decides Whether the Agreement Permits or Prohibits Classwide Arbitration, a Court or the Arbitrator?
By: and Tyler KringPosted on August 10, 2016Just last week a small majority of the California Supreme Court in Sandquist v. Lebo Automotive, Inc. affirmed the Court of Appeal, holding that as a matter of state contract law, the question of...
AB 1513 Update- Court Denies Preliminary Injunction
By: Please be advised that court denied the Nisei Farmers League's Preliminary Injunction. View a copy of the court's order here. In light of this ruling, the deadline to register with the DIR for the "safe harbor" provision under...
AB 1513- July 18, 2016 Update on Court’s Hearing Concerning Plaintiff Nisei Farmers League’s Motion for a Preliminary Injunction
By: Monday, July 18, 2016, I attended the hearing on Plaintiff Nisei Farmers League's Motion for a Preliminary Injunction in the Fresno Superior Court before Judge Jeffrey Hamilton Jr.After a three and a half hour hearing, the court took...
AB 1513 UPDATE – Temporary Injunction Granted to Prevent California from Enforcing the July 1, 2016 Deadline to Sign Up for “Safe Harbor Defense”
By: Posted on July 1, 2016 This is to update you on the Nisei Farmers League's constitutional challenge to the AB 1513 affirmative defense, and specifically, the deadline to notify DIR of your company's intention to participate in the...
Serving California’s Businesses and Individuals
Years