Contrary to popular belief, most business disputes do not go to trial. If your business is facing a dispute, litigation may not be the only option to resolve it. You may be able to resolve your dispute with the help of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) methods. If you do not understand your options for resolving disputes, you may need to seek the guidance of an experienced business law attorney. Our team of attorneys at Robinson Bradford LLP can evaluate your situation to help you decide on the best course of action in your case. Also, we pride ourselves on guiding our clients towards success. We represent clients with all types of alternative dispute resolution options and litigation in Stockton, California, as well as Temecula and Costa Mesa. What Is Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)? Alternative dispute resolution refers to methods that allow the parties to resolve disputes less formally outside of the courtroom. As the name implies, ADR methods are an alternative to litigation. When resolving a dispute through ADR, parties to a dispute work with a neutral third party (a mediator) to negotiate a mutually agreeable solution or let a neutral decision-maker (an arbitrator) make a legally binding decision for them. According to the U.S. Department of Labor, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) provides a forum for the parties to a dispute to work out a voluntary agreement without having a judge to decide for them. ADR methods are commonly used to resolve both employment and business disputes. Common Alternative Dispute Resolution Methods Three of the more commonly used alternative dispute resolution methods are: Mediation. This ADR method allows the parties to work with a neutral, third-party mediator to resolve their dispute. The mediator facilitates communication between the parties to a dispute to help them reach a voluntary and mutually acceptable agreement. However, the mediator does not make the decision for the parties. Arbitration. This ADR method is slightly different from mediation. The parties refer their dispute to an arbitrator or a panel of arbitrators who apply the law to the facts of the dispute and make a legally binding decision for the parties. Unlike mediators, who do not have decision-making power, arbitrators can decide the case when the parties cannot agree on their own. Med-Arb. Med-Arb is a hybrid ADR method that combines mediation and arbitration processes. As the name implies, the parties first agree to mediate their dispute. If their attempts to resolve the dispute through mediation fail, their case will proceed to arbitration, where an arbitrator will make a binding decision for the parties. If you are not sure which ADR method to choose to resolve your dispute, you must contact a knowledgeable attorney to explore your options. Our business law attorneys at Robinson Bradford LLP help businesses in Stockton, Temecula, and Costa Mesa resolve their disputes through ADR methods or litigation, depending on the facts of the dispute and the parties’ willingness to negotiate. What Are the Benefits of ADR? There are many benefits of choosing alternative dispute resolution over litigation, including but not limited to: Cost. ADR methods such as mediation and arbitration are generally much more cost-effective compared to taking a dispute to trial. Time. Litigation can be extremely time-consuming when resolving business disputes. ADR is generally quicker than going to court. Depending on the complexity of the dispute, the litigation proceedings could last for months or years. Disruption. Pending litigation can disrupt your business operations in different ways. Choosing ADR methods, on the other hand, is generally less disruptive. Publicity. Litigation is public, which means your business and its operations will be subject to public scrutiny. ADR methods such as mediation and arbitration are private forms of dispute resolution. Even if your business dispute does not go to court, you still need an attorney to protect your interests and help you navigate the dispute resolution process. Discover Your Options The business law attorneys at Robinson Bradford LLP recognize that business disputes are sometimes best resolved through alternative dispute resolution methods such as mediation and arbitration. ADR methods are generally less expensive and time-consuming and bring less disruption to businesses. Get a free consultation today to discuss the available ADR methods in your particular case. Our team has the knowledge, resources, and experience necessary to assist your specific situation in Stockton, California, as well as Temecula and Costa Mesa.
Business competition can sometimes be ruthless, but just competing with another entity for customers, sales, and profits is not generally illegal. However, both California contract law and tort law allow for legal action when a third party wrongfully interferes with a contract or ongoing business relationship to the detriment of the affected party. This type of action falls under the general label of tortious interference. A tort, unlike a crime, is a civil wrong that can be addressed in civil court. Generally, there are three types of tortious interference recognized in California. One is interference with contractual relationships (IWCR). Another is interference with prospective economic advantage (IWEP). A third type, not based on intentional acts, is negligent interference with an economic advantage when no contract is involved. If you feel your business is being harmed by tortious or negligent interference, contact the business law attorneys at Robinson Bradford LLP. With offices in Stockton, Temecula, and Costa Mesa, we proudly serve business clients in the Golden State. With a combined half-century of experience, our attorneys can examine the circumstances of your claim, advise you of your legal options, and help you mount any legal or other action necessary to protect your business interests. Understanding Tortious Interference Perhaps the most famous case of tortious interference in the United States came in 1984 when Texaco interfered with efforts by Pennzoil to purchase Getty Oil. Pennzoil prevailed and was awarded $10 billion in economic and punitive damages, with the two parties later agreeing on $3 billion. Tortious interference is not a single statute on the books in California or any other state but evolves through court cases and precedents set. In fact, as recently as 2020, the California Supreme Court was still interpreting the requirements for proving any type of tortious interference. In Ixchel Pharma, LLC v. Biogen, Inc., the court ruled that in any type of tortious interference claim, the plaintiff must show “independent wrongfulness” by the defendant or interfering party. Otherwise, it said, legitimate business competition could be chilled and restrained. Types of Tortious Interference As referenced earlier, there are three forms of tortious interference – two intentional, one negligent, one involving contracts, and the others ongoing or prospective business relationships. These are: INTENTIONAL INTERFERENCE WITH CONTRACTUAL RELATIONSHIPS: In this type, there needs to be a written or oral contract governing the activities of the parties to the contract. For instance, Company A may contract with Company B to supply chips to power its line of manufacturing plant robots. Company C steps in and offers Company B more for its chips. B agrees and either shortchanges its shipments to A, eliminates them altogether, or says it won’t comply until the higher price is met. C has intentionally interfered with a contracted agreement. INTENTIONAL INTERFERENCE WITH PROSPECTIVE ECONOMIC ADVANTAGE: Here there may not yet be a contract, but A and B are in the stages of agreeing on a business plan that will benefit both. C interferes to siphon off any prospective advantage to itself. The business arrangement between A and B may already be ongoing, and C’s actions threaten to or actually do disrupt the advantages enjoyed or envisioned by A and B. NEGLIGENT INTERFERENCE WITH PROSPECTIVE ECONOMIC ADVANTAGE: Here the interference by C may result in the same loss of advantage by A and B, or one or the other, but the interference need not be shown to be intentional. The standard is that the defendant, or interfering agent, knew or should have known about the relationship and economic prospects enjoyed by A and B but interfered anyway. Proving Tortious Interference If you go to court and prevail, you can generally recover damages, usually lost profits. Punitive damages are also available if the interfering party acted with “malice, fraud or oppression.” In other words, the defendant not only intended to interfere but also aimed to cause deliberate harm. In any tortious interference lawsuit, the plaintiff alleging the interference must show: There was an existing contract or business relationship based on economic necessity. The interfering party knew or should have known about this relationship. The defendant, intentionally or wrongfully, interfered with that relationship. The interference caused economic and/or other losses to the plaintiff. Turn to Skilled Legal Guidance If you suspect someone or another business is interfering with your contracts, business relationship, or prospective economic advantage, you need skilled and experienced legal counsel on your side to assess the situation and propose legal options going forward. The business law attorneys at Robinson Bradford LLP stand ready to help you with any tortious interference claim. Not every instance needs to go to court, but all need to be dealt with and resolved, either through negotiations and confrontation or filing a lawsuit. Contact Robinson Bradford LLP when you feel your business is illegally interfered with in Stockton, Temecula, or Costa Mesa, California.
When people hear the term “trade secret,” they often think of the formula for Coca-Cola, which is locked inside a vault at corporate headquarters in Atlanta, Georgia, and is never known by more than two people at one time. The two parts of the term – trade and secret – pretty much reveal what a trade secret is. First, it is an idea, concept, marketing strategy, customer base, algorithm, recipe, formula, a machine, a process, or just about anything that gives a business – a trade -- a competitive advantage over its rivals. Second, it must be protected as if it’s a secret, whether in a vault, like Coca-Cola, in protected databases, or through nondisclosure agreements and other efforts to keep the information from falling into the hands of competitors. California, like most other states, has adopted the Uniform Trade Secrets Act (UTSA) to allow businesses and individuals to protect their trade secrets from what the state calls “misappropriation” rather than theft, which is actually what may have led to its unauthorized use by others. If your business has seen its trade secret misappropriated by others, or you have been accused of misappropriating another entity’s trade secret, in Stockton, Temecula, or Costa Mesa, California, contact the attorneys at Robinson Bradford LLP. With our combined 50 years plus experience in business disputes and litigation, we can listen to your story, explain your legal options to you, and attempt to fight for your rights. Understanding Trade Secrets According to the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), a trade secret has three components, which in the agency’s own words are: information that has either actual or potential independent economic value by virtue of not being generally known, is valuable to others who cannot legitimately obtain the information, and; subject to reasonable efforts to maintain its secrecy. Though trade secrets, unlike copyrights, patents or trademarks, are not registrable with a government agency such as the USPTO, federal laws do protect them. The Economic Espionage Act of 1996 protects the owners of trade secrets and allows for criminal action by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) for their theft. The Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) of 2016 expands the Economic Espionage Act to allow for civil action by those possessing trade secrets that have been misappropriated. The DTSA does not override any state trade secret laws, but it allows those abused to choose between state and federal civil actions. California Law on Trade Secrets The California Uniform Trade Secrets Act (UTSA) is found in the California Civil Code Section 3426.1, whose definition of trade secret mirrors the USPTO version: “Trade secret” means information, including a formula, pattern, compilation, program, device, method, technique, or process, that: (1) Derives independent economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally known to the public or to other persons who can obtain economic value from its disclosure or use; and (2) Is the subject of efforts that are reasonable under the circumstances to maintain its secrecy. The same section defines misappropriation in two ways -- as the acquisition by improper means, and as through the use and disclosure of trade secrets. Improper means include theft, bribery, misrepresentation, breach, or espionage whether through electronic means or otherwise. A former employee who takes a trade secret to a competitor by downloading it or taking a physical copy is using improper means. The second definition includes a former employee’s use and disclosure of confidential customer information to, for instance, solicit customers for a new employer. Former Employer Provision There is also the concept of “inevitable disclosure,” meaning that a former employee cannot wipe clean their knowledge gained during previous employment, and thus the revelation of trade secrets is a natural occurrence. California courts generally reject the inevitable disclosure defense but at the same time require that the former employer must have actual evidence of the use and disclosure of trade secret information before bringing a lawsuit. Getting Experienced Legal Counsel If your business suspects your trade secret has been misappropriated or is being accused of misappropriating a trade secret, you need to seek out experienced legal counsel. Trade secret disputes can be complex and challenging. The victim of trade secret misappropriation may be awarded damages – compensation – for any lost revenue due to the act, and the misappropriating party may be required to compensate the trade secret holder. For all your trade dispute issues – including taking the proper measures to protect your trade secrets – contact the attorneys at Robinson Bradford LLP. We have a half-century’s worth of experience in resolving business disputes and exercising the rights of the parties involved. We proudly serve clients in Stockton, Temecula, and Costa Mesa, California.
The federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) of 1938 virtually revolutionized the U.S. workplace by instituting a standard workweek of 40 hours, a minimum wage, overtime pay of time-and-a-half one’s hourly wage after 40 hours, and establishing recordkeeping and child labor regulations. The legislation required states to follow these standards so long as they participated in interstate commerce, but it also allowed states to pass legislation exceeding the FLSA. In recent decades, California has more and more been on the vanguard of labor law legislation pushing FLSA standards to new heights. While the FLSA did not mandate sick time, vacation days, or meal or rest periods for workers, the Golden State mandates three sick days a year, though it raised that to two weeks during the pandemic. Though the state does not mandate vacation time, it has put in place vigorous protections for those who enjoy these benefits at work. And, on the meal and rest period front, California has indeed filled in the void left in the FLSA. If you are an employee in or around Stockton, Temecula, or Costa Mesa, California, and you’re being denied meal or rest break rights, or if you simply want more information to make an informed decision, contact the employment law attorneys at Robinson Bradford LLP. Together, we have over 50 years of trial experience defending employee rights. Robinson Bradford LLP proudly represents clients throughout Stockton, Temecula, and Costa Mesa, California. California Laws on Meal and Rest Breaks California regulates businesses in California through a series of what it calls work orders. They are usually industry-specific but can be sometimes difficult to decipher. These orders govern wage-and-hour issues and other employment conditions. Some employers get confused about when a meal or rest break is required by state law and for how long. For starters, you should know that rest and meal breaks apply only to nonexempt employees, generally meaning those who are on hourly wages. Exempt employees are those paid by salary or commission rather than an hourly rate. In basic terms, California requires that nonexempt workers receive a 10-minute paid rest break for every four hours they work. According to the state’s Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE), work periods of more than two hours constitute a “major fraction” of the four-hour standard, but no rest period is required if an employee works fewer than three-and-a-half hours. Further, employees enjoy the right to a “net” 10-minute break, which means that they should be allowed to take their breaks near the middle of each four-hour period in a place away from their work area, if possible. The latter could present an issue for the employer since the 10 minutes are supposed to begin once the employee is relieved of all duties. But, what if the breakroom is a five-minute walk away? As for meal breaks, employees must receive a 30-minute unpaid meal break for every five hours of work. If they work 10 hours, they are entitled to another 30 minutes, but they can waive this entitlement if the first break was taken on time. Meal breaks must begin before the fifth hour of work has been reached. So, if an employee starts at 9 a.m., the meal break must begin by 1:59 p.m. If employees work no more than six hours, they can waive the meal break requirement. On-duty meal breaks are permitted only if the nature of the work prevents the employee from being relieved of duty, but an on-duty meal break must be agreed to in writing and must be paid. Lactation Accommodation By law, every California employer must provide a “reasonable amount of break time” for an employee to pump breast milk for the employee’s infant each time the employee has a need to do so. The law allows this period to coincide with regular rest breaks, but if it doesn’t, then it need not be paid. The employer must also provide a room dedicated to this activity that is separate from restrooms and shielded from view. Premium Pay for Breaks Denied If an employer fails to provide any of these mandated rest and meal break periods, the employee is entitled to one hour of premium pay for each break period violated. The definition of premium payment has been subject to debate, but a California appeals court recently ruled that it means the employee’s regular base hourly rate of pay. The California Supreme Court has agreed to review the issue. ffff If you or a loved one has been subjected to violations of meal and break periods mandated under California law, contact us at Robinson Bradford LLP. We know California employment law and have extensive experience in helping employees exercise the full extent of their rights. If you’re located in or around Stockton, Costa Mesa, or Temecula, California, reach out now. Let’s discuss your situation, weigh your options, and advise you of your best path forward.
According to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), human resources management is predicted to grow at a faster rate than the combined average of all other professions by 2028. As such, compliance with local, state, and federal laws governing a company’s human resources continues to grow increasingly complicated. Proper classification of employees is one of the most prominent compliance issues and one of the most confusing. The rise of the gig economy has muddied the legal waters on who employers must classify as employees and who as independent contractors. After AB5 became law in California, codifying a state Supreme Court decision handed down in 2018, many gig workers—especially those in the app-driven rideshare and food delivery industries—should have been classified as employees. The passage of Proposition 22 in 2020 exempted those gig employees from AB5, but in 2021, a California District Court ruled that Prop 22 is unconstitutional. The enormous confusion surrounding employee classification is not a free pass for employers. They are obligated to follow the law and face consequences if they fail to do so. If you are an employer in Stockton, Temecula, Costa Mesa, or anywhere else in California, it’s smart to work with a seasoned employment law firm like Robinson Bradford LLP. We have been helping employers navigate compliance with employee classification for nearly two decades. What is Employee Classification & Why Is It Important? There are many levels involved with classifying employees, such as which ones are hourly and which ones are salaried. Then there’s the larger issue of which workers are employees of your company and which are independent contractors. Independent contractors typically do not qualify for most of the benefits employers are required to provide for employees. They operate their own business on their own terms, lack the permanency of an employee position, and may have skills employee positions in the company do not have. Employees work for the company on a full- or part-time basis, at the behest of the employer. In addition to at least minimum wage, employers must provide such benefits as unemployment and workers’ compensation insurance, Social Security and Medicare contributions, and for some, health insurance subsidies and paid time off. With many employee benefits and protections required by law, such as the Fair Labor Standards Act, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Family and Medical Leave Act, and the Immigration and Nationality Act, employers who fail to properly classify employees risk breaking not only these federal laws but a multitude of California employment laws as well. How Does California’s Enactment of AB5 Affect My Company? In 2018, the California Supreme Court rendered a decision in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles, creating case law that presumed that someone who performs services for an employer is an employee unless that person can be classified as an independent contractor based on a three-part test referred to as the “ABC Test.” The court applied the test in the Dynamex case. In 2019, the California legislature codified the case law with the passage of the law referred to as AB5. In that law, the ABC Test was specified to determine whether someone who performs services for an employer met the requirements to determine if that person is an independent contractor and therefore, not an employee. Based on the ABC Test, a worker should be classified as an employee unless the employer can meet all three of the following requirements: A. The person is not under the direction and control of the employer for how the work is done; B. The person is providing services that are not a part of the usual employee positions the employer hires workers to do; and, C. The person does the same type of work independently for individuals and entities other than the employer. Workers who meet all three requirements, are independent contractors and are therefore not entitled to the same protections and benefits as employees. There are some exceptions to the ABC Test, including such licensed professionals as physicians, accountants, lawyers, engineers, architects, and commercial fishermen. What Are the Penalties if I Don’t Comply? Failure to comply with California labor law exposes you to civil actions allowed under the Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act which means workers who should have been classified as employees and were not can sue for damages related to wages, benefits, and other protections under the law. Lawsuits are not only extremely expensive and time-consuming to defend but can severely damage a company’s reputation in the eyes of its customers, vendors, and employees. How Robinson Bradford LLP Can Help Employee misclassification is a serious matter as well as a complicated one. Even highly-trained human resources professionals can be perplexed by the issue, and one mistake can prove costly to a company’s reputation and its bottom line. If you have questions about whether you are properly complying with employee classification laws, Robinson Bradford LLP can help. Our attorneys stay abreast of labor laws and regulations and can help client companies remain in compliance. Don’t wait for a disgruntled employee to sue. If you live in Stockton or anywhere else in California, reach out to Robinson Bradford LLP today.
According to the National Partnership for Women and Families, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) receives approximately 7,000 pregnancy discrimination claims yearly. Fortunately, California is at the forefront of protecting employees’ rights in general and pregnant women’s rights and welfare specifically. The Golden State’s Pregnancy Discrimination Leave (PDL) policy allows up to four months of leave for women who are facing difficulties associated with pregnancy or childbirth. After that, 12 additional weeks under the California Family Rights Act (CFRA) may be available if both the employer and employee meet the law’s requirements. If you feel that you have been illegally denied your rights as an employee under PDL, and you’re in the Stockton, Costa Mesa, or Temecula regions, contact Robinson Bradford LLP. Our attorneys are well versed in all of California’s leave laws and workplace protections, and we will help you fully exercise your rights for what you are legally entitled to. What Is Pregnancy Disability Leave? Pregnancy Disability Leave, or PDL, is a California program enabling women to take four months of leave when they face complications from pregnancy or childbirth. Employers with five or more employees are legally responsible for administering the program. A pregnancy disability is a physical or mental condition that prevents you from performing the essential duties of your job. Generally, the disabling condition must be certified by a physician. Note, however, that pregnancy itself is not considered a disability under California law. Since the PDL allows for up to “four months” of leave, employers initially assumed that to mean 16 weeks, but the law was clarified by the state to mean 17 and 1/3 weeks of leave (52 weeks divided by 3). The leave can be taken all at once or intermittently. Who Qualifies for PDL? If you work for an employer with five or more employees, you are entitled to PDL. Unlike other leave laws, there is no length-of-service requirement to be eligible. You can take PDL once each year if you suffer a pregnancy disability as described next. The conditions that qualify for PDL include, but are not limited to, severe morning sickness, bed rest, pregnancy-induced hypertension, postpartum depression, loss or end of pregnancy, prenatal or postnatal care, gestational diabetes, preeclampsia, childbirth, and recovery from childbirth. Miscarriages and pregnancy terminations are also covered under the PDL. Workplace Rights and Benefits Continue Under the PDL If you receive health insurance at your place of employment and your employer pays for it, your employer is obligated to continue providing that benefit while you are on PDL. Your employer cannot require you to use vacation or other paid time off leave as part of your PDL, but they can require you to use your accumulated sick days. In addition, your seniority at work will continue to accrue while on leave. Your employer is also obligated to return you to your previous or comparable position when your leave is over. Reasonable Accommodations If your disability does not qualify for full leave, it may qualify for a reasonable accommodation at work if your physician deems such accommodation as “medically advisable.” The standard here is that the woman is “affected” but not “disabled” by the pregnancy. Unlike reasonable accommodations under legislation such as the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the employer cannot argue the accommodation poses an “undue hardship.” The employer is required, through an interactive process with the employee, to provide an accommodation to suit the pregnant employee’s medical or physical limitations. Accommodations might include assignment to less strenuous duties, physical modifications to the employee’s workspace, or longer or more frequent break periods. Baby Bonding The PDL does not exist for purposes of baby bonding, and it does not allow your spouse or partner to use the benefits. Only those who qualify under the definitions of pregnancy disability listed above can avail themselves of the PDL. All employees, including the mother, however, are entitled to bonding leave under the California Family Rights Act (CFRA) and the federal Family Medical and Leave Act (FMLA), but for these programs, there are length-of-service requirements. Both the CFRA and the FMLA require that you have worked for the same employer for at least 1,250 hours in the preceding 12 months to qualify. (The months do not need to be contiguous if the job is seasonal or otherwise interrupted for business purposes.) For the FMLA, your company must employ 50 or more persons within a 75-mile radius to qualify. For the CFRA, the employer must have at least five employees on the payroll. Both parents can qualify under either program, and a bonding leave of up to 12 weeks can be taken under either program or both programs simultaneously. PDL and CFRA cannot run simultaneously, however, though you can take your 12 weeks for bonding following the conclusion of PDL. You cannot stack CFRA and FMLA on top of one another for 24 weeks of leave. Turn to Us at Bradford Robinson LLP for Help Not all employers are fully conversant with California’s leave and disability laws, and they may react accordingly, maybe even denying your request for PDL. But if they have five or more employees on the payroll, they are obliged to provide Pregnancy Disability Leave. If you run into any PDL roadblocks, before, during, or after your leave, contact us at Robinson Bradford LLP. We will listen to your story and help you exercise your rights under California law. We proudly serve clients in and around Stockton, Temecula, and Costa Mesa, and all surrounding communities.
California takes meal break and rest period requirements seriously. In 2019, Walmart lost a class action lawsuit filed on behalf of 5,000 workers at a fulfillment center in Chino. The award was $6 million for missed meal breaks. Although federal law mandates no rest periods or meal breaks except for nursing mothers, California has specific statutes mandating both for non-exempt (hourly) employees as well. If you feel your employer has been illegally denying you rest breaks, meal periods, or both, and you’re in the Stockton, Temecula, Costa Mesa, or Irvine areas of California, contact Robinson Bradford LLP. We will listen to your story, investigate, and help you exercise your rights not only to those guaranteed breaks, but also for penalties under the law owed to you for being denied them. Federal Law on Meal and Rest Breaks Federal law in the form of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) does not require employers to offer their workers either meal or rest breaks. However, if an employer does offer rest breaks, federal law requires that the employee be paid for that time. When it comes to “bona fide” meal breaks, however, there is no federal requirement to pay the employee. Bona fide generally means a break of 30 minutes or more. The employer is not required to allow employees to leave the worksite during a meal break. California Law on Meal and Rest Breaks California, on the other hand, has definite rest and meal break statutes on the books. The Golden State requires employers to provide a 30-minute unpaid meal break once an employee has worked five hours. If an employee works 10 or more hours, he or she will be entitled to a second meal break, but can waive that one if the previous one was taken. Employers must also allow employees to take a 10-minute break for every four hours, or major fraction thereof, worked. If practical, the break should come in the middle of the four hours. No break is required if the employee works three-and-a-half hours or less. Rest breaks must be compensated. These rest and meal break laws apply only to non-exempt employees, who generally are paid by the hour. Exempt workers for whom these laws don’t apply are those employees who: Spend more than half their time doing managerial, intellectual, or creative work, Exercise independent judgment and discretion in performing their duties, and Earn a monthly salary equal to at least twice the California minimum wage. Collective bargaining agreements that contain their own meal and rest standards also fall outside the rules for non-exempt employees. People working in the motion picture industry and those working as security guards, among other professions, will often have contracts specifying how meals and rest periods are to be handled. Break Time for Nursing Mothers Federal law does mandate that employers provide reasonable break time for an employee to express breast milk for a nursing child for one year after the child’s birth. There is no limit to the number of times a nursing mother can take such a break. The break time need not be compensated unless it coincides with an already-available and paid break period. The employer is also required to provide a place other than a bathroom for expressing milk, which must be secluded from the view of others and completely private so that no one can enter or interrupt. Penalties Under California Law The California Labor Code requires that an employer who “fails to provide a meal or rest or recovery period . . . shall pay the employee one additional hour of pay at the employee’s regular rate of compensation for each workday that the meal or rest or recovery period is not provided.” The regular rate of compensation and its meaning came under review by the California Supreme Court, which ruled that it meant more than just the employee’s standard hourly wage. Instead, it must include considerations such as shift differentials and nondiscretionary bonuses, the same formula used for calculating overtime pay. Trust the Skilled Experience of Robinson Bradford, LLP Robinson Bradford LLP is dedicated to helping employers in wage-and-hour disputes exercise their rights to the compensation and benefits they are entitled to under the law. We have helped hundreds throughout the Stockton, Temecula, and Costa Mesa areas get the pay and perks they deserve under the law. If you feel you’re being denied your rights to meal and rest breaks, contact us immediately for a free consultation.
Losing your job is a tough situation. In the past year, the unemployment rate reached an all-time high due to the pandemic. As of last July, 19.9 million people were unemployed. Whether you had a suspicion that termination might happen or it came out of the blue, it leaves you in a place scrambling to figure out where your next source of income will be. If you were on leave, you may have been unfairly terminated. Employees on leave have rights, and if those are violated, you can bring forth legal action and seek recourse. Robinson Bradford LLP will defend your rights if you have been discriminated against while taking your lawful leave. We are skilled litigators, dedicated advocates, and experienced negotiators who will fight relentlessly for you. We represent clients in and around Stockton, California, Temecula, California, and Costa Mesa, California. Laws Protecting Leave Rights There are several federal laws, as well as state laws, that protect employees on leave in a variety of situations: The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA): The Family Medical Leave Act allows eligible employees of covered employers to take unpaid, job-protected leave for specified family and medical reasons with continuation of group health insurance coverage under the same terms and conditions as if the employee had not taken leave. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA): The Americans with Disabilities Act prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities in several areas, including employment. It allows for reasonable accommodations to be made for those with disabilities at work, including a need for leave. Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA): The Pregnancy Discrimination Act forbids discrimination based on pregnancy when it comes to any aspect of employment, including hiring, firing, pay, job assignments, promotions, layoff, training, fringe benefits, such as pregnancy leave and health insurance, and any other term or condition of employment. California Family Rights Act: The California Family Rights Act (CFRA) authorizes eligible employees to take a total of up to 12 weeks of paid or unpaid job-protected leave during a 12-month period. While on leave, employees keep the same employer-paid health benefits they had while working. Employees can take this time for various familial reasons, such as caring for an immediate family member or the birth or adoption of a child. An employer cannot terminate an employee on leave if they are protected by the laws above. This can fall under discrimination and is illegal. When an Employer May Terminate an Employee On Leave While these laws protect employees in many situations taking leave, there are still circumstances where you can be fired while on leave. If you work for an employer that is not covered by state or federal leave laws or anti-discrimination laws, or if there is a mass layoff, you can be terminated. Many people are "at-will" employees so they can be fired for a number of legal reasons. Getting the Experience Legal Guidance You Need If you took a leave of absence and your employer terminated your employment, it might have been an illegal termination. Knowing your leave rights is important and will help you assess whether to file a claim or complaint against your employer. An experienced employment law attorney can help in this situation. Our firm can investigate and guide you through the claims or litigation process. We will listen to your case, communicate your options, and help you fight passionately against discrimination. If you live in Stockton, California, Temecula, California, or Costa Mesa, California, contact us today to schedule a free consultation with knowledgeable employment law attorneys.
These days, everyone is familiar with workplace issues like minimum wages, overtime pay, and the 40-hour workweek, but prior to the Great Depression, these were not legislated rights. Some states had begun implementing minimum wages, but not until 1938 and the passage of the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) did these protections for working Americans become the law of the land. The FLSA still sets the floor for minimum wage and overtime pay standards across the country, but states are free to aim higher and set loftier standards. One such state is California, which has always prided itself on being a pacesetter in moving the legislative bar. Though counties and municipalities in California can set their own minimum wage, the state establishes overtime pay standards, and the Golden State is one of the more progressive in the country. If you think your employer has been cheating you out of overtime pay, contact our team of employment and labor law attorneys at Robinson Bradford LLP. We will review your situation and advise you of your options going forward. At Robinson Bradford LLP, we serve clients in Stockton, Costa Mesa, Temecula, and the neighboring communities. Who Is Entitled to Overtime Pay? When addressing the issue of overtime, both federal and state standards should be taken into consideration. Federal Standards On the federal level, the FLSA covers all employees, not otherwise exempt, who work more than 40 hours in a given workweek, and requires payment one-and-a-half times the employee’s regular hourly rate for every excess hour over 40. It defines the workweek as any 40-hour schedule established by the employer during a recurring 7-day (168-hour) period. The FLSA exempts from overtime pay employees who work in executive, administrative, professional, computer, or outside sales capacities. They must be paid a minimum of $684 a week to qualify and meet other obligations. California Standards California uses the same workweek definition as specified in the FLSA, but it expands the awarding of overtime pay. In California, if an otherwise non-exempt employee works more than 8 hours in a single day, he or she must be paid overtime. If the overtime work exceeds 12 hours, then the pay jumps to double the normal hourly rate. If the employee works on the seventh day in the defined workweek, that pay must be one-and-a-half times the normal rate. Working more than 8 hours on the seventh consecutive day earns double time. California exempts the same categories as does the FLSA and requires those falling under these exempt categories to earn at least twice the state’s minimum wage. For 2021, the minimum exempt salary for companies with 25 or fewer employees is $54,080 per year. If an employer has 26 or more employees, the exempt salary rises to $58,240. Independent contractors and those working under a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) are also exempt, but the CBA must provide both minimum wage and overtime protections at least as stringent as the state’s — or higher. Independent contractor status is closely guarded in California and only those who routinely control their own work schedules and agree to provide a service for a set amount qualify. Certain specialized occupations with their own rules, such as camp counselors, live-in household workers, or agricultural workers are also exempt. California also allows businesses to set up alternate work weeks. For instance, a company may decide to set the workweek as 10 hours a day for 4 consecutive days. Overtime would then kick in above 10 hours. These arrangements, however, must be agreed to by at least two-thirds of the workforce. Unauthorized Overtime What if you routinely work past the clock to catch up on things, but your employer has not requested or authorized you to do so? Under the FLSA, you are still required to be paid overtime. Section 785.11 of the FLSA states: "Work not requested but suffered or permitted is work time.” The FLSA places the onus on the employer to monitor overtime activities. Section 785.13 explains: "In all such cases it is the duty of the management to exercise its control and see that the work is not performed if it does not want it to be performed.” California law mirrors these provisions, saying overtime pay is due if the employee is “suffered or permitted to work, whether or not required to do so.” Likewise, it is up to the employer to monitor and control overtime schedules. Employment Law Experience You Can Trust Our attorneys at Robinson Bradford LLP have been helping employees fight back against violations of labor and employment law for more than two decades. If you feel you’ve been owed back overtime pay, or worse, that you’re being routinely abused of your right to overtime pay, contact us for a case evaluation. We will listen to your story, investigate, and guide you in pursuing the compensation you’ve earned and deserve. With multiple locations, we serve clients in Stockton, Costa Mesa, Temecula, and the surrounding communities. Don’t sit back and let your employer take advantage of you. Contact us immediately.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 17.9% of persons with a disability were employed in 2020. Those with disabilities are much less likely to be employed than those without a disability. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), more than 7 million — or 1 in 4 — adults in California have a disability. If the national statistic is applied, it would mean that more than 1.2 million California employees have a disability. If you are working with a disability, you may have questions about what your employer is required to accommodate under state and federal laws. The days should be far behind us when those with a disability are kept from pursuing jobs and careers, but that is not always the case. Understanding your rights under the law is where you should begin. For nearly 20 years, Robinson Bradford LLP has helped employees with disabilities understand the protections afforded to them under the law. We have represented clients in Stockton, Temecula, and Costa Mesa, California in a variety of different employment law matters — and we would be proud to help you too. What Does the Americans with Disabilities Act Mean for Me? The landmark Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) prohibits employment discrimination based on an employee’s disabilities. The Act guarantees reasonable employer accommodation, including changes to a job or physical workplace that allow a qualified employee to perform the duties of their job. In California, employees are further protected by the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), the Unruh Civil Rights Act, and the Disabled Persons Act. Employers, housing owners, and businesses are required to make reasonable accommodation for those with disabilities. Employers may not discriminate against qualified workers with disabilities in recruitment, hiring, firing, training, promotions, wages, benefits, layoffs, and leave policies. Who is Covered Under the Law? Under the ADA, you must have, or have a record of, or be regarded as having a substantial impairment that substantially limits major life activity. Impairments to hearing, seeing, speaking, walking, breathing, learning, working, performing manual tasks, and performing activities of daily living, such as dressing yourself, qualify you for protection under the law. Furthermore, you must be qualified to perform the essential functions of a job with or without reasonable accommodation to be protected. If your education, experience, knowledge, and other factors do not meet job requirements, there is no employment discrimination. California law expands protections to those with conditions that limit life activities, including physical and mental disabilities, medical conditions, and HIV/AIDS. What Does “Reasonable Accommodation” Mean? Reasonable accommodations are changes made to the workplace, job, or processes that allow a qualified applicant or employee with disabilities to perform the essential duties of the job and enjoy the same benefits as employees without disabilities. Accommodations can be changes to the physical workplace, such as wheelchair-accessible desks or devices that accommodate vision or hearing disabilities. They can also be alterations to work schedules to allow time, for example, for an employee with cancer to seek medical treatment or fewer hours of work per week. Accommodations might also include having an application or test administered verbally or, for example, available in a braille version. Is My Employer Required to Provide Accommodations? Job discrimination is unlawful by private employers, governmental entities, employment agencies, labor organizations, and labor-management committees. Requirements for providing reasonable accommodation do not apply if those accommodations would place undue hardship on the employer. Large employers can afford the cost of construction, equipment, or furniture to provide reasonable accommodation while a small business may not be able to pay the cost and keep their doors open. Can My Employer Ask for Proof of Disability? An employer is prohibited from asking you about your disability or making you provide proof of disability. They are allowed to ask questions to ascertain whether you can perform the duties of a particular job with or without accommodation. Remember, if you don’t meet the requirements of the job, there is no discrimination. For example, if a job requirement is that you hold a college degree and you do not, you are not qualified for that job. They can only ask questions pertinent to the job itself; the same questions they would ask any employee. An employer also is prohibited from asking you to do something they do not ask all employees to do. If all employees are required to undergo a periodic medical exam, for example, the employer can require it of you as well. Any medical information about you is protected under HIPAA laws and must be kept in a confidential file separate from your employment file. Allow Robinson Bradford LLP to Help You As you can tell, employment law can be complicated. There are very fine lines between what employers can and cannot ask or do and what they are required to do under state and federal laws. Even if you read the applicable laws, it is often difficult to understand their application in specific situations. That’s why it is always wise to consult with a California employment law attorney who fully understands the laws and regulations that apply to your unique situation. At Robinson Bradford LLP, we are fierce and dedicated advocates for employees with disabilities in Stockton, Temecula, and Costa Mesa, California. We believe that anyone qualified to do a job should be allowed to, regardless of disability. If you have a disability and want more information about your protections under the law, call our office to schedule a consultation. We’d be happy to sit down and discuss the details of your circumstances, answer all of your questions, and outline how we can help you. Contact our office today!