AP Photo/Paul Sancya
The California Business & Industrial Alliance (CABIA) founder, Tom Manzo, first heard of PAGA the Private Attorney General Act when his mid-sized manufacturing business was hit with a PAGA lawsuit at the end of 2016. Craven labor attorneys can cherry-pick out of over 1,000 plus pages of the California Labor Code to file lawsuits without legitimate basis, and have been successful in bankrupting mom and pop concerns across the State.
Manzo created CABIA to combat the evils of PAGA, and Manzo has been on board with the fight against AB5, the so-called gig workers law that has destroyed the livelihood of thousands of freelance, independent professionals, and self-employed in California.
Monday, February 1, 2021
A look at the most significant cases and stories in class and collective litigation last year, and the anticipated impact of these developments in 2021:
1. Pandemic-related class actions lie in wait
The COVID-19 pandemic was the most significant challenge employers had to reckon with in 2020, and COVID-19-related litigation continues to evolve alongside the ever-changing workplace. Although companies faced an onslaught of employment claims related to the pandemic and its operational and financial impact, relatively few of these were class filings.
According to the Jackson Lewis COVID-19 Employment LitWatch, there were more than 1,300 COVID-19 related employment complaints filed in federal and state courts in 2020; only 67 of those complaints were class or collective actions. However, multi-plaintiff lawsuits are expected to pick up steam in 2021, as the nation continues to contend with the most recent surge and the pandemic’s ongoing economic
Bank Employee Who Was Harassed By A Customer Can Proceed With Sexual Harassment Claim
Christian v. Umpqua Bank, 2020 WL 7777882 (9
th Cir. 2020)
Jennifer Christian, a former employee of Umpqua Bank, alleged she was sexually harassed by one of the bank’s customers in violation of Title VII and Washington state law. Among other things, the customer dropped off “small notes” stating that Christian was the “most beautiful girl he’[d] seen” and that he “would like to go on a date” with her. After Christian informed the customer that she was not interested, the customer sent her a long letter stating that she was his “dream girl” and they were “meant to be together.” Flowers and references to their being “soulmates” soon followed. Christian notified the bank manager and others in the workplace about the customer’s repeated overtures toward her, but her colleagues just warned her “to be careful.” Eventually, in response to Christian’s repeated requests
January 2021 California Employment Law Notes Friday, January 29, 2021
Christian v. Umpqua Bank, 2020 WL 7777882 (9
th Cir. 2020)
Jennifer Christian, a former employee of Umpqua Bank, alleged she was sexually harassed by one of the bank’s customers in violation of Title VII and Washington state law. Among other things, the customer dropped off “small notes” stating that Christian was the “most beautiful girl he’[d] seen” and that he “would like to go on a date” with her. After Christian informed the customer that she was not interested, the customer sent her a long letter stating that she was his “dream girl” and they were “meant to be together.” Flowers and references to their being “soulmates” soon followed. Christian notified the bank manager and others in the workplace about the customer’s repeated overtures toward her, but her colleagues just warned her “to be careful.” Eventually, in response to Christian’s repeated requests,
Tech
your username
January 28, 2021
On Monday, the State of California filed an opposition to DoorDash, Inc.’s motion to stay proceedings pending the resolution of a parallel case brought by private parties. California’s case, filed last summer, revolves around the defendant’s alleged misclassification of its drivers as independent contractors in violation of state labor law. California contended that stay is neither legally warranted nor harmless to California’s interests.
In its Dec. 21, 2020 motion to stay proceedings, DoorDash contended that the court should pause the case because the resolution of a parallel proceeding, brought under the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) before another San Francisco Superior Court department, would bind California. The defendant also argued that because both cases’ allegations and claims for relief are similar, the court should exercise discretion in the name of judicial economy. In the PAGA action, DoorDash has agreed to settle