In the course of assisting employers with compliance-related matters, we frequently encounter issues of concern where employers require or expect employees to use their personal mobile devices for work-related matters. In the customer service-intensive environment of a car dealership, employees are expected to be readily available to customers, and it is the norm for salespersons and service advisors to provide customers with their personal cell phone numbers for ready access. However, where the employee is required or expected to use his/her personal device to perform work duties, the employer is obligated under California law to reimburse the employee for any costs associated with such use.

As we reported previously in Coffee Break, employers have a new notification obligation regarding the rights of employees who are domestic violence victims, and now the contents of the required notice has been made available.

The Fair Employment and Housing Commission has issued new regulations for California employers regarding criminal history inquiries that took effect July 1, 2017. These regulations have many similarities with prior guidance issued by the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission on the same subject. The new rules do not prohibit employers from considering criminal information altogether but mandate a process for employers to follow in using such information in an employment decision.

To add to its Northern California presence and further deepen its trial bench, The Scali Law Firm today announced that it has added Bruce Nye as Attorney Of Counsel. Nye has tried over fifty jury and bench cases, including the landmark Proposition 65 case, Baxter Healthcare Corporation v. Denton (2004) 120 Cal.App.4th 333.

Starting this month, auto dealers struggling to stay on top of a shifting and increasingly complex quagmire of regulations and rulings can get help and guidance from the RACER consulting firm. RACER (Retail Automotive Compliance & Ethics Resource) is not an outside auditor. For a flat monthly fee, it trains management on how to implement and manage compliance policies and procedures in the areas of human resources, F&I, OSHA, sales and BAR.

One of the key issues in any sale of dealership assets is whether a bulk sale notice is required under California law prior to the closing of the transaction. It is important to understand when a bulk sale notice is required because the failure to give the notice when required can result in potentially serious adverse consequences for both the buyer and the seller.

In 2000, the California Supreme Court set forth the standards of unconscionability applicable to invalidate mandatory arbitration agreements in the employment context in Armendariz v. Foundation Health Psychcare Services, Inc. In the past years, litigation of arbitration provisions has boomed. In 2011, the United States Supreme Court decided AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, finding that the Federal Arbitration Act preempted California’s Discover Bank case rule prohibiting class action waivers in arbitration agreements. However, the enforceability of class action waivers has since been challenged on several occasions.

What is Administrative Wage Garnishment? Who can order one? How do you comply with it? And what happens if you don't? We look at this debt collection process that allows a federal agency to order an employer to withhold up to 15 percent of an employee's disposable income to pay a nontax delinquent debt owed to the agency, without a court judgment or order.

Using a staffing agency for certain job categories at an auto dealer, i.e., porters and janitors, may be a convenient and efficient way to meet staffing needs and screen potential future employees without the administrative burdens of hiring and payroll. But using a staffing agency does not create a free pass for the dealership. Existing law allocates substantial employment practices compliance burdens equally to staffing agencies and their clients, especially where a “joint employer” relationship exists. Here are some issues to remain mindful of...

Most dealers would soon go out of business if they lost their flooring line. And flooring agreements are often strongly one-sided in the flooring lender’s favor. But this doesn’t mean that a dealership is entirely at its flooring lender’s mercy when the lender decides to turn the screws. In fact, in some circumstances, over-reaching by the flooring lender may provide a dealership the opening it needs to keep its flooring line in place, even if only for long enough to find an alternative lender.

Upwards of 90% of all civil lawsuits settle before trial. Given the near inevitability of settlement before trial, posturing a case for settlement is a vital component of any litigation strategy and the California state legislature enacted Code of Civil Procedure Section 998 to assist civil litigants to this end.

Yesterday, a Southern California plaintiff’s wage and hour class action law firm, known for filing massive class actions against auto dealers on behalf of service technicians under the infamous 2013 California Court of Appeal decision in Gonzalez v. Downtown LA Motors LP, initiated a blitzkrieg on Facebook targeting employees of numerous auto dealer groups.

On March 29, 2017, the Labor Commissioner’s Office provided additional guidance regarding Paid Sick Leave requirements in the form of frequently asked questions and answers thereto. This guidance is interpretive and is not binding, but may be followed if tested in the courts.

The Fair Employment and Housing Council has approved amended regulations pertaining to gender identity and transgender individuals in the workplace. These regulations take effect July 1, 2017. Some of the amendments merely clean up existing language (for example, references to “both sexes”) to allow broader and more neutral gender references. Other amendments impose additional obligations/prohibitions for employers, such as...

OSHA finalized new electronic injury and illness reporting rules in May 2016 that would require certain employers to submit electronic reports with injury and illness data. These new reporting requirements were scheduled to go into effect July 1, 2017 and were to be phased in over two years. Specifically, businesses with 250 or more employees in industries covered by the recordkeeping regulation (which includes car dealerships) were required submit information from their 2016 Form 300A by July 1, 2017. These same employers would be required to submit information from all 2017 forms (300A, 300, and 301) by July 1, 2018. Beginning in 2019 and every year thereafter, the information would be due by March 2.

Under California’s Labor Code (Sections 551 and 552), employees are entitled to one day's rest in seven, and employers are not permitted to cause employees to work more than six days in seven. These rules do not apply in a week in which the employee didn’t work more than 30 hours or more than 6 hours on any day of that week (Section 556). These rules also do not apply when the nature of the employment reasonably requires that the employee work seven or more consecutive days, if in each calendar month the employee receives days of rest equivalent to one day's rest in seven.

Real estate buy sell transactions typically involve items of so-called due diligence, i.e., items which the buyer must investigate and either approve or disapprove by a stated deadline. Such items include financing, status of title, and condition of the property. This raises important questions for the buyer.

The California Wage Orders regulate many of the wage/hour obligations that employers deal with every day, including overtime pay, exemptions, meal/rest breaks, minimum wage, reporting time pay and alternative workweek schedules, to name just a few. There are different wage orders that cover different industries/occupations, although there is substantial overlap in the provisions of most wage orders. Car dealerships are generally covered by Wage Order 7 (Mercantile Industry). With the ongoing increases in the California minimum wage, the Industrial Welfare Commission has issued an amendment to the existing Wage Orders that updates the provisions involving the minimum wage rate.

In Featherstone v. Southern California Permanente Medical Group, a California Court of Appeal maintained the boundary that was created when an employee became a former employee. In that case, the plaintiff/employee took some time off from work for a medical condition, and not long after returning to work, she informed her supervisor over the phone that she was resigning her employment. A few days later, she confirmed her resignation in an email to her supervisor. The employer then promptly processed the employer’s resignation and issued her final pay. Days later, the employee requested to rescind her resignation, stating that at the time she resigned, she was on medication for her condition that altered her mental state and caused her to resign. The employer declined her request to rescind the resignation. The employee then sued for disability discrimination under the Fair Employment and Housing Act, as well as wrongful termination in violation of public policy.

Progressive discipline policies are preferred by many employers as a method to ensure fair and consistent administration of disciplinary action and more predictability for employees. However, employment plaintiffs love to use these policies against employers to deflect attention from their bogus claims onto an employer’s supposed shoddy practices. Here are a few tips to limit the extent an employment plaintiff can try to use these progressive discipline policies against you.