We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 101

Employer not required to conduct background check, and not liable to customer who was pistol-whipped by employee

  • Fenwick & West LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 11 2012

In Harris v. KFC U.S. Properties, Inc., a federal district court in Pennsylvania ruled that the operator of a Kentucky Fried Chicken outlet in Philadelphia was not liable to a customer who was pistol-whipped by a store clerk

New York employer's flex-time policy precluded holding employee accountable for tardiness

  • Fenwick & West LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 13 2013

Flex-time policies are fairly common among U.S. employers, and allow employees to arrive and leave work within a defined time range, instead of

Employees must be paid for on-call time while required to stay on work premises

  • Fenwick & West LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 19 2013

In Mendiola v. CPS Security Solutions, Inc., a California Court of Appeal ruled that security guards must be paid for time spent on-call where they

Settlement approved of class action over requirement that Footlocker employees wear athletic shoes purchased at employee expense

  • Fenwick & West LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 13 2012

In Kullar v. Footlocker, a California court of appeal approved a settlement of a class action lawsuit for almost $1.3 million covering about 18,000 employees arising out of, among other claims, an employer requirement that the employees wear athletic shoes to work that had to be purchased at the employee's expense

Retaliation against employee for filing worker’s compensation claim does not support california wrongful termination claim

  • Fenwick & West LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 13 2012

In Dutra v. Mercy Medical Center Mt. Shasta, the employee sued alleging, among other claims, that the hospital wrongfully terminated her in violation of public policy in retaliation for having filed a workers' compensation claim

California court rules that unemployment benefits were properly denied for termination based upon employee's refusal to sign disciplinary memorandum

  • Fenwick & West LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 11 2012

In Paratransit, Inc. v. Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board, an employee appealed the denial of his claim for unemployment insurance benefits where the employer terminated him for refusing to sign a disciplinary warning

Long-awaited California Supreme Court decision resolves thorny meal period and rest break issues favorably for employers

  • Fenwick & West LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 17 2012

In a long-awaited and ultimately favorable decision for employers, the California Supreme Court served up much needed clarification regarding an employer's wage and hour obligations to hourly workers

Court upholds commissioned salesperson exemption

  • Fenwick & West LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 14 2011

In California, certain commissioned salespersons may be properly classified as exempt from overtime

Coca-Cola Company properly required employee to undergo mental examination after employee threatened co-workers

  • Fenwick & West LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 19 2013

In Owusu-Ansah v. The Coca-Cola Company, the employee challenged the employer's requirement that he undergo a mental examination as a condition of

Employee allowed to challenge drug test as ADA violation

  • Fenwick & West LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 10 2009

In Bates v. Dura Auto. Systems Inc., a federal district court in Tennessee held that a jury must decide plaintiff's claim that the employer's random drug testing program violated the ADA