Labor & Employment Law Blog

In the case of Trivedi v. Curexo Technology Corp. published on October 20, 2010, a California appellate court refused to enforce an arbitration provision in an employment contract on the ground that it contained multiple unconscionable provisions. By permitting it to pursue injunctive relief in court, and by including a provision in the agreement requiring that the prevailing party be awarded its attorneys’ fees and costs, the employer forfeited its ability to enforce the agreement when the employee sued for discrimination and wrongful termination.

The Los Angeles Daily Journal reports that corporate counsel who participated in a recent survey are seeing increases in a variety of employment related claims, especially: wage-and-hour disputes; labor union matters; discrimination cases based on alleged age, sex, gender, and disability, and Employee Retirement Income Security Act claims. According to the Daily Journal, "Wage-and-hour disputes ...

The California Supreme Court recently upheld the Governor's unilaterially-implemented mandatory furloughs of represented state employees.  Professional Engineers in California Government, et al. v. Arnold Schwarzenegger, et al., California Supreme Court Case NO. S183411, October 4, 2010. The Court determined that the Budget Act of 2008 "reasonably included the furlough plan that was then in existence," therefore the Legislature approved the Governor's furlough plan as required by law. The Court's ruling was premised on state law that specifically requires the Legislature to approve provisions of memoranda of understanding requiring the expenditure of state funds in the annual Budget Act.  

Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed nine out of the eleven employment-related bills we were tracking that made it to his desk for approval.