Labor & Employment

Last week, the California Supreme Court agreed to decide two unique questions with far-reaching implications for employer liability: (1) may an employer be held liable to an employee’s spouse when an employee contracts COVID-19 in the workplace and then infects their spouse at home, and (2) does an employer have a duty of care to

In a decision issued on June 2, the National Labor Relations Board modified the timing of its electronic notice-posting requirement in circumstances where an employer has not yet reopened its facility due to COVID-19, or where a substantial complement of employees has not yet returned to work on-site when the employer “may be communicating with

As covered previously here, the California Chamber of Commerce (“Chamber”) once again has identified a handful of “job killer” bills making their way through the legislative process.  This year’s crop of proposed legislation would, among other things, inflate employer data reporting requirements and further expand the scope of the Fair Employment and Housing Act

In Michelle Roman v. Hertz Local Edition Corp., a United States District Court Judge for the Southern District of California granted summary judgment in favor of Hertz, and against former employee Michelle Roman, whose employment was terminated after she contracted COVID.  Roman claimed that her job should have been protected by the California Fair Employment

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act prohibits employment discrimination based on religion and requires that employers provide reasonable accommodations for employees’ sincerely held religious beliefs, practices and observances. The COVID-19 pandemic and resulting employer vaccine mandates have brought this duty into sharp relief in the past year.

Employees—many of whom may never have expressed

California’s Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board has voted for the third time to readopt and revise the Cal/OSHA COVID-19 Emergency Temporary Standards (“ETS”), which lay out guidelines for testing, masking, and other COVID-19 prevention measures for employers to follow with respect to their employees and workspaces.  The most recent ETS took effect on May 6. 

California law requires employers to furnish a “safe and healthful” workplace to employees. Now that the line between “workplace” and “home” has been blurred for so many workers in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, the law has been unclear as to whether that obligation extends to an employee whose “workplace” happens to be their

Labor law is not at the heart of the French presidential campaign, which is rather unusual. The latest major reforms, initiated under the presidency of François Hollande and then extended by the “Marcon” ordinances of September 22, 2017, seem to lead to an exhaustion of legislative inflation in this area. The overhaul of the organization

The California Senate Labor, Public Employment and Retirement Committee recently passed Senate Bill 1044, moving the legislation one step closer to a vote by the full state senate. SB 1044 would permit employees, without notice, to leave their workplace—or not show up to work at all—if they “feel unsafe.”

SB 1044 would prohibit employers from