When you become aware of a potential violation of law or Company policy, as a conscientious Human Resources professional or Company manager you want to promptly and appropriately address the situation and more forward. However, managers often jump to focus on the corrective measures they think will appropriately address the situation before stopping to consider that there may be other sides to the story of which they are not aware. Moreover, should your corrective action result in some adverse employment action, such as discipline, demotion or termination, your process of determining the appropriate corrective action will be subject to second-guessing and scrutiny should the employee later challenge the action. While your corrective process may be correct and may have been the fair and appropriate response, you can save your employer the time and expense of proving that point in court or before an arbitrator if you focus on conducting a fair and effective investigation instead of worrying about the result.

Under the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”) employers who use background checks (such as criminal history or credit reports) of applicants or employees are required to provide clear and conspicuous written disclosure of the applicant/employee’s rights under the FCRA. The written disclosure must be provided in a document that consists solely of the disclosure. The third-parties doing the background checks often provide employers their own disclosure forms to give to applicants, and the employers might assume that these forms are legally compliant.

As many of you have read, last month The Sage Automotive Group, a California dealer group, reached a settlement agreement with the Federal Trade Commission for charges that the dealership group used deceptive and unfair sales and financing practices, deceptive advertising, and deceptive online reviews. The FTC described the charges as the first in the nation brought by the FTC for so-called “yo-yo financing.” Now that the dust has settled, this brief article looks at the allegations and discusses some best practices to avoid suffering a similar fate.

The Scali Law Firm is a proud sponsor of the UCP Humanitarian of the Year Award Dinner at which Rick Niello, President of firm client, The Niello Company, will be awarded the prestigious and well-deserved award of 2017 Humanitarian of the Year. The event is at The Hyatt Regency, Sacramento, CA, on Thursday, May 18, 2017 at 5:30 PM to 9:00 PM.

The wave of regulatory enforcement disruption being perpetuated by the Trump administration in various ways looms for auto dealers in the form of shakeups at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and Federal Trade Commission (FTC). Scali Law attorneys Christian Scali and Monica Baumann explore what dealers can expect in this article, published on F&I and Showroom.

The California New Car Dealers Association is the country's largest state association of franchised new car and truck dealers representing over 1,100 dealer members. The Scali Law Firm is once again proud to be a Gold Sponsor of the CNCDA's annual Dealer Day legislative conference.

When an employee requests a medical leave, a covered employer’s first concern is determining whether the employee qualifies for protected leave under the Family Medical Leave Act and California Family Rights Act. If the employer determines that the employee does not qualify for such leave (for example, the employee has less than a year of service or has not worked the requisite number of hours) the employer may let down their guard and not issue any leave paperwork to the employee. This is a mistake.

Various laws, including the National Labor Relations Act, protect certain employee speech and expression at work. Also, language restrictions may run afoul of discrimination laws. Here are some common situations in which employers must be careful in restricting employee expression.