California employers must establish a regular payday and are also required to post a notice of the day, time, and location of payment. An employee who is discharged must be paid all wages, including accrued vacation, immediately at the time of termination. Here are answers to some frequently asked questions about paydays, pay periods, and final wages. How frequently must a California employee pay its workers? Subject to some exceptions, employers must pay workers twice during each calendar month on days designated in advance by the employer as regular paydays. Can an employer pay an employee in cash? Yes. The employer must give the employee a separate writing showing required information such as: Gross wages earned Total hours worked If the employee is paid on a piece-rate basis, the number of piece-rate units earned and any applicable piece rate All deductions Net wages earned The inclusive dates of the pay period The name of the employee…Read More
Federal and state employment laws protect California employees from workplace discrimination. This means that if your employer subjects you to unlawful negative treatment based on your membership in a protected class, you may be able to file an employment discrimination claim. While federal laws protect certain classes from discrimination and harassment, California state law extends these protections to additional classes of people. What are California Protected Classes A “protected class” is one of the foundations of anti-discrimination law. The legality of some misconduct may be based on whether it is motivated by the victim’s membership in a “protected class.” In an employment law context, the application of the concept of protected classes may determine the legality of an employee’s termination. It may also determine whether mistreatment is merely bullying or harassment, the latter being illegal. Under federal law, it is illegal for an employer to discriminate because of your: Race Sex Color Age (40 and older) Religion…Read More
While some states mandate that employers must pay workers for unused vacation time when terminated, most states utilize a “use-it-or-lose-it” system where current employees are not compensated if they fail to use vacation time. However, employers may still choose to pay workers for unused time off under an employment contract. Thus, in this situation, an employee may be entitled to compensation either through state law or contract. Employers have the freedom to contract within applicable state contract law. This includes the right to regulate the accrual and payment of vacation benefits in an employment contract. If the employer and employee agree to the contract, it is binding on the parties. California law considers vacation time as a form of wage. This includes paying the worker for unused vacation days and sick leave. California requires employers to pay for unused paid time off (PTO) when terminating a worker. Therefore, employers must pay employees any unused vacation pay in the paycheck for their final pay period. However,…Read More
The COVID-19 delta variant continues to surge despite vaccination rates rising in more places throughout the country. Here are answers to some frequently asked questions about California employment law relating to COVID-19 testing and vaccination. Is an employer required to compensate an employee for the time spent obtaining a COVID-19 test or vaccination? If an employer requires employees to obtain a COVID-19 test or vaccination then the employer must pay for the time it takes for the testing or vaccination, including travel time. Why? Because this time would equate to “hours worked” as defined as the time during which a worker is subject to the control of an employer. May an employer require employees to submit to a medical test to detect the presence of the COVID-19 virus or antibodies before permitting employees to enter the workplace? Under the FEHA, an employer may mandate a medical examination when it is job-related and consistent with business…Read More
California employers are legally required by Labor Code § 226 to provide accurate, itemized wage statements showing “all applicable hourly rates in effect during the pay period and the corresponding number of hours worked at each hourly rate by the employee.” A California employer, semi-monthly or at the time of each payment of wages, must provide to employees, either as a detachable part of the check, draft, or voucher paying the employee’s wages, or separately if wages are paid by personal check or cash, an accurate itemized statement in writing. This itemized statement must show the following information: gross wages earned, total hours worked by the employee, the number of piece-rate units earned and any applicable piece rate if the employee is paid on a piece-rate basis, all deductions, net wages earned, the inclusive dates of the pay period, the name of the employee and only the last four digits of his or her social security number…Read More
Meal and rest break compliance is often a problem for many California employers. California workers must understand any California laws that apply to meal and rest breaks. Here are some answers to frequently asked questions about California’s requirement that employers provide meal periods to their employees. What are the basic requirements for meal periods under California law? Under California law, an employee must be provided with no less than a thirty-minute meal period when the work period is more than five hours (more than six hours for employees in the motion picture industry). How does an employer satisfy its legal obligation to provide a meal period? Employers must do more than simply make a meal period “available.” Generally, to satisfy its obligation to provide a meal period, an employer may not impede or discourage employees from using their meal period and an employer must: relieve employees of all duty, relinquish control over their activities, and permit them…Read More
In July of 2021, President Joe Biden signed an Executive Order on Promoting Competition in the American Economy (“Order”). The purpose of this action is to encourage the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) to exercise the FTC’s statutory rulemaking authority to “curtail the unfair use of non-compete clauses and other clauses or agreements that may unfairly limit worker mobility.“ Biden’s action is part of a larger effort to promote competition and remove barriers to economic growth in the country. The White House believes that non-compete agreements drive down wages by making it harder for workers to switch to jobs with higher wages. The Order does not have any effect on current law or the enforceability of non-competition agreements in any context in any jurisdiction. In no way does the Order require employers to modify their existing non-competition agreements. The Order is to “encourage[s]” the FTC to “consider” using its authority to “curtail the unfair use of non-compete clauses.” These…Read More
The COVID-19 pandemic seems far from over with a late July surge in many parts of the country. California workers remain subject to the workplace risks posed by the coronavirus. Here are some frequently asked questions related to workplace issues that may arise because of the pandemic. *Is an employee entitled to receive compensation for reporting to work and then being sent home by the employer? In most cases, if an employee reports for a regularly scheduled shift but works fewer hours or is sent home, the employee must be compensated for at least two hours, or no more than four hours, of reporting time pay. For example, a worker who reports to work for an eight-hour shift but only works for one hour must receive four hours of pay – one for the hour worked and three as reporting time pay. This allows the worker to receive earnings for at least half of an…Read More
In June, the Supreme Court decided a case with major implications for class action lawsuits. After the Court reviewed a Ninth Circuit case, it held that only a plaintiff concretely harmed by a defendant’s violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) has Article III standing to seek damages against that private defendant in federal court. Although the case involved a class of individuals who sued one of the nation’s three major credit reporting bureaus, TransUnion, in federal court under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the case raises issues for those defending class actions in federal court. The case’s 5-4 holding that most of the class members in the class action did not suffer concrete harm necessary for Article III standing redefines standing and class definitions in most class action litigation. The case, TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, No. 20-297, 594 U.S. __, 2021 WL 2599472 (June 25, 2021) involved a class of 8,185 individuals who alleged that TransUnion…Read More
Even though California is an employment-at-will state, California law prohibits employers from firing an employee for discrimination based on age, race, sexual orientation, disability, relation, national origin, or sex. Employers are also prohibited from retaliating against an employee for certain actions, such as the employee participating in lawful conduct occurring during nonworking hours and away from the employer’s premises. The Labor Commissioner of the California Department of Industrial Relations enforces the California laws that specifically prohibit discrimination and retaliation against employees and job applicants. Complaints against an employer must be filed within one year of the allegedly illegal act unless the law state otherwise. Currently, deadlines to file complaints have temporarily been suspended due to the coronavirus pandemic. Wrongful termination laws protect California workers when they are dismissed from their employment for unlawful reasons. Workplace retaliation laws protect workers who do not suffer a loss of employment but other adverse employment consequences because of the illegal retaliatory actions…Read More
