On April 6, 2017, the California Supreme Court held that an arbitration agreement waiving the right to public injunctive relief is contrary to California public policy and is unenforceable under California law. In McGill v. Citibank, NA,Plaintiff Sharon McGill filed a class action lawsuit against Defendant Citibank arising from Citibank’s offering of a credit insurance…

Read More ›
Category: Arbitration,

Number 40:  “Me Too” Evidence “Me too” evidence is testimony from employees other than the plaintiff who claim that they were subjected to discrimination, retaliation or harassment during their employment.  Plaintiffs often seek to have this evidence admitted at summary judgment or trial because they usually only have circumstantial evidence to support their case.  Employers,…

Read More ›
Category: EEO,

Number 17:  What Happens When An Employer Has Mixed Motives? What happens when an employer decides to terminate an employee for discriminatory and non-discriminatory reasons?  The Supreme Court gave a surprising answer to that question of “mixed motives” in its seminal 1989 decision: Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins.

Read More ›
Category: EEO,

Electronic cigarettes are battery-operated devices that emit vaporized doses of nicotine (or non-nicotine) that is inhaled.  The vapor produced by e-cigarettes is smokeless and does not contain the amount of harmful chemicals that regular cigarettes have.  Many fans of electronic cigarettes credit these devices with helping them to cut down on or quit smoking altogether.

Read More ›

Last week, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors approved an ordinance that requires employers to consider workers’ requests for flexible work arrangements and predictable work schedules due to caregiving responsibilities.  The ordinance also prohibits discrimination based on an employee’s status as a caretaker or parent.  Edwin M. Lee, the City’s Mayor, has stated his intention…

Read More ›