New regulations issued by the California Fair Employment and Housing Council (FEHC) impose additional limitations on an employer’s use of criminal history information, and expand the types of criminal history that employers are prohibited from considering.  Effective July 1, 2017, these regulations prohibit an employer from considering criminal history in employment decisions if doing so would result in an adverse impact on individuals within a protected class, such as race, sex, or national origin.  An applicant or employee has the burden of proving adverse impact, but if ...

As a reminder, the minimum wage in the City of Los Angeles and in the City of Santa Monica will increase to $12.00 an hour on July 1, 2017, for employers with 26 or more employees.  The minimum wage for employers in these cities with fewer than 26 employees will increase to $10.50 an hour on July 1, 2017.

There is another increase set for July 1, 2018, in the City of Los Angeles and Santa Monica that will raise the minimum wage to $13.25 an hour for employers with 26 or more employees. For smaller employers in these cities, the increase on July 1, 2018, will be to $12.00 an hour.

Employers in the City of ...

Question: I am the Receiver for a condo project. A pre-receivership creditor has threatened to sue me because I won’t pay for the services he provided the defendant. I have explained to the creditor that the receivership is not liable for pre-receivership debts of the defendant and that all the assets in the receivership are security for the plaintiff (bank). The creditor has said he does not care, that if I don’t pay him he will sue me and that the court must allow his lawsuit to go forward. Is he correct?

Answer: You did not indicate whether your receivership is in federal or state ...

QUESTION:  I have seen a number of receivers file motions purporting to be interim versions of final accounts and reports, seeking orders approving fees and costs part-way through a receivership. Given that California Rule of Court 3.1183(a) states that all interim fees are reviewable and may be adjusted at the hearing on the Final Account and Report, is there really any point to this practice? Is an order approving interim fees worth the paper it’s written on?  

ANSWER:  Up until earlier this year I would have doubted it. Rule of Court 3.1183(a) states interim fees are just that: interim ...

The recent Los Angeles Fair Chance Initiative for Hiring requires, among other things, that employers post a notice of the ordinance at job sites and workplaces.  The City of Los Angeles has now provided the notice that must be posted along with guidelines and other information regarding the ordinance.  The notice should be placed in a conspicuous location that employees and job applicants can access

This blog is presented under protest by the law firm of Ervin Cohen & Jessup LLP.  It is essentially the random thoughts and opinions of someone who lives in the trenches of the war that often is ...

I have received a few questions from employers about the recent California Supreme Court decision in McGill v. Citibank, N.A..  The McGill case isn’t an employment law case, but rather deals with a consumer class action.  In McGill, the California Supreme Court held that an arbitration provision that attempted to entirely waive an individual’s right to seek public injunctive relief (pursuant to the Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA), unfair competition law (UCL), and false advertising law) is unenforceable. In so holding, the Court noted that CLRA expressly declares that the ...

QUESTION: I was appointed receiver for an apartment building. I operated the property for six months, then the defendant filed bankruptcy. I filed a claim, as a superseded custodian, under 11 U.S.C. § 543. The debtor objected to my fees and made various other crazy objections. I had to hire counsel to defend my fees and to deal with all the objections. Debtor’s counsel now claims my counsel and I are not entitled to be paid for having to defend my fee request. Is that correct?

ANSWER: The Supreme Court has held that fees incurred in defending fee applications in bankruptcy cases are not ...

Effective January 1, 2017, Assembly Bill 2532 eliminates the requirement that private employers contracting with state and local government agencies to provide specified employment services verify an individual’s legal status or authorization to work prior to providing services to that individual, as required by federal procedures.  AB 2532 also repeals posting requirements that notices be placed in prominent locations stating that only persons authorized to work in the United States be permitted to use the agency’s or the organization’s employment services. 

This ...

Effective January 1, 2017, Senate Bill 1015 removes the 2017 sunset provision of 2013’s Assembly Bill 241, the Domestic Worker Bill of Rights, which granted overtime protections to California’s privately hired domestic workers who are personal attendants.  The law is therefore permanent.  Under the Domestic Worker Bill of Rights, daily overtime is required after 9 hours worked in one day and weekly overtime after 45 hours are worked in one week.

This blog is presented under protest by the law firm of Ervin Cohen & Jessup LLP.  It is essentially the random thoughts and opinions of ...

A prior Ask the Receiver® discussed the Fifth Circuit case Janvey v. The Golf Channel, Inc., 780 F. 3d 641 (5th Cir. 2015) (“Golf Channel I”). There the court found The Golf Channel liable to return $6,000,000 paid to it for advertising services it provided, that were used to help solicit investors in the Allen Stanford Ponzi scheme. The court found the advertising did not provide “reasonably equivalent value,” from the standpoint of the Stanford creditors, and, therefore, could not be used to support The Golf Channel’s defense to the receiver’s fraudulent transfer ...