On December 18, 2019, Hirschfeld Kraemer attorneys Kirstin Muller, Alison Hamer, Benjamin Treger, and China Westfall presented a one-hour webinar, “California Employment Laws 2020: Your Survival Guide.” The webinar provided a comprehensive overview of what employers need to know in order to stay in compliance in 2020. 2019 was a remarkable year in California employment law. Sacramento lawmakers…
Read More ›
We enter 2017 with a new President, a polarized electorate, an incomplete Supreme Court, and an increasingly isolated California. Against this dramatic backdrop, Glen Kraemer will examine the most important recent appellate decisions and legislation in the equal employment opportunity arena, while forecasting discrimination law trends that could dramatically impact our State in the new…
Read More ›
As of last week, employers, co-workers, and teachers may now seek ex parte gun violence restraining orders against individuals shown to present a substantial likelihood of danger of self-harm or harm to others under A.B. 61. Signed into law by Governor Newsom on October 11, 2019, and effective as of September 1, 2020, A.B. 61…
Read More ›
2019 California Legislative Update For Employers It’s been a busy session for the California Legislature, passing multiple employment-related bills that Governor Newsom has signed or that are awaiting his signature. The Governor has until October 13 to sign the pending bills. Below is a topline summary of important bills, some of which will or could…
Read More ›Number 37: The Supreme Court Raises The Bar On Proving Retaliation Throughout this series, we have discussed how common retaliation claims have become and how challenging the courts have found it to define “causation” in the context of Title VII cases. Those two trends intersected recently when the U.S. Supreme Court was called upon…
Read More ›Number 32: Understanding Retaliation Claims Under Title VII and the Employee’s Good Faith Belief Requirement One of the plaintiffs’ bar’s perennial favorite claims is the amorphous and, hence, ubiquitous retaliation claim. Over the years, the law under Title VII has made these claims more difficult for plaintiffs to bring. At the same time the federal courts…
Read More ›Every year the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) releases statistics reflecting how often various claims are presented to them. And every year one claim stands heads and shoulders above the rest: retaliation. Last year, over 41% of all EEOC claimants brought a retaliation claim – far more than any other claim.
Read More ›In California, a plaintiff alleging retaliation can survive summary judgment, or prevail at trial, simply by showing that her protected activity was a “substantial motivating factor” in her adverse employment action. But, does that same, relaxed standard apply to cases under Title VII? That was the question addressed in University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center…
Read More ›In case you slept late this morning, you missed a flurry of activity in the world of employment law. The U.S. Supreme Court issued a trio of decisions which affect workplace relations. In Vance v. Ball State University, the Court held that a supervisor for purposes of vicarious liability under Title VII is a someone whom…
Read More ›On May 20, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court announced its decision to hear its first-ever Sarbanes-Oxley Act whistleblower case in Lawson v. FMR LLC et al. The lower court’s controversial decision centered on whether SOX’s whistleblower protections apply to employees of privately held companies that are contractors to public companies. Plaintiffs Jackie Lawson and Jonathan…
Read More ›