Search

Search form

Mitchell F. BoomerBlog Posts

See all

Ninth Circuit Demands Strict I-9 Compliance

Ketchikan Drywall Services v. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, No. 11-73105 (9th Cir. Aug. 6, 2013):  Ouch, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld $172,000 in penalties against the employer for failing to maintain correctly completed I-9 Forms.  The employer argued that it substantially complied with the law by copying the relevant documents … Continue reading Ninth Circuit Demands Strict I-9 Compliance
August 8, 2013

U.S. Supreme Court Rules Legally-Married Same-Sex Spouses Entitled to Federal Recognition and Lifts California Ban on Same-Sex Marriages

On Wednesday the United States Supreme Court issued two decisions that expand same-sex marriage rights. In the first, United States v. Windsor, the Court ruled unconstitutional a law denying federal recognition of legally-married same-sex couples. In the second, Hollingsworth, et al. v. Perry, the Court…   Click here to read the full article.
June 28, 2013

U.S. Supreme Court Adopts “But-For” Causation Test for Title VII Retaliation Cases.

In a welcome decision, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Ctr. v. Nassar, No. 12-484 (June 24, 2013), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled yesterday that retaliation claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 must be established using a “but-for” causation standard, denying the argument asserted by plaintiff and the EEOC that the … Continue reading U.S. Supreme Court Adopts “But-For” Causation Test for Title VII Retaliation Cases.
June 25, 2013

U.S. Supreme Court narrows definition of “supervisor” for Title VII purposes. Will California courts follow?

In Vance v. Ball State University, No. 11-556 (June 24, 2013), the United States Supreme Court defined “supervisory” authority under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1962 as requiring the power to make “a significant change in employment status, such as hiring, firing, failing to promote, reassignment with significantly different responsibilities, or a … Continue reading U.S. Supreme Court narrows definition of “supervisor” for Title VII purposes. Will California courts follow?
June 25, 2013

Public Employer Required To Provide Union With Addresses and Phone Numbers of Union and Non-Union Employees Alike

The California Supreme Court has just ruled that Los Angeles County must provide the union representing its employees under an “agency shop” agreement with the home addresses and telephone numbers of all county employees, including non-union employees. County of Los Angeles v. Los Angeles County Employee Relations Comm’n (Serv. Employees Int’l Union, Local 721), No. S191944 (Cal. May … Continue reading Public Employer Required To Provide Union With Addresses and Phone Numbers of Union and Non-Union Employees Alike
June 5, 2013

Forum Selection Clause Trumps California Public Policy. Really.

Score one for Washington in a recent dispute between competing employers from Washington and California.  In Meras Engineering, Inc. v. CH20, Inc., a Northern District of California Court enforced a forum selection clause designating Washington as the venue for all disputes — rejecting the California parties’ argument that litigating in Washington would defeat California’s strong public policy against covenants not … Continue reading Forum Selection Clause Trumps California Public Policy. Really.
June 5, 2013

Don’t Forget the Salary Basis Test!

Most litigation over whether employees are classified properly as exempt from overtime turns on whether employees spend the majority of their work time performing exempt duties. However, employers should not forget the salary basis requirement. In Negri v. Koning & Associates, No. H037804 (Cal. Ct. App. May 16, 2013), the California Court of Appeal assumed … Continue reading Don’t Forget the Salary Basis Test!
June 5, 2013

CBAs Must Clearly Spell Out Waiver of Unpaid Vacation

California law prohibits “use it or lose it” vacation policies and, under Section 227.3 of the California Labor Code, requires all accrued vacation to be paid on termination of employment, “unless otherwise provided by a collective bargaining agreement.” Examining the meaning of the collective bargaining exception for the first time, the California Court of Appeal … Continue reading CBAs Must Clearly Spell Out Waiver of Unpaid Vacation
June 4, 2013

Handbook Policy Rescues Binding Arbitration Agreement

While employees continue to challenge binding arbitration agreements with gusto, California courts have shown a consistent willingness to enforce agreements where fundamental fairness exists. In Serpa v. California Surety Investigations, Inc., No. B237363 (Cal. Ct. App. Apr. 19, 2013), a California Court of Appeal reversed a trial court order denying the employer’s motion to compel … Continue reading Handbook Policy Rescues Binding Arbitration Agreement
May 6, 2013

Attorneys in Same Firm Cannot Act as Public Entity’s Advocate and Advisor in a Single Matter

The California Court of Appeal has ruled that public agencies are prohibited from using partners in the same law firm as an advocate in a contested matter and as an advisor to the decision maker in the same matter, even if the law firm has established an ethical wall between the partners. Sabey v. City … Continue reading Attorneys in Same Firm Cannot Act as Public Entity’s Advocate and Advisor in a Single Matter
April 30, 2013

Pages