- Written by Anthony Oceguera & Jason Yang
In addition to establishing an overtime pay phase-in for wage order 14 employees, AB 1066 also eliminated other longstanding exemptions. This included eliminating the exemption to the seventh day rest requirement, which provides that employees are entitled to one day’s rest in every seven days. Under the California Labor Code, employers cannot “cause” their employees to work more than six days in every seven. However, at the time of AB 1066’s passage, there was no accepted interpretation of what “cause” meant, although the matter was before the California Supreme Court.
- Written by Jarred Lieber
Earlier this week in Gamble v. JP Morgan Chase & Company, et al., the 6th Circuit upheld a lower court decision throwing out the claim of a stockbroker against his employer for disability and age discrimination. Plaintiff argued that his employer violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”) because, after he suffered a heart attack, his employer failed to accommodate his disability and terminated him following his disability leave. Under the ADEA and ADA, if a plaintiff does not present any direct evidence of discrimination, he or she is required to show, among other things, that he or she is “otherwise qualified for the position.” To make this decision, courts look to whether the employee is able to perform the “essential functions” of the job. Here, Plaintiff did not present any direct evidence of age or disability related discrimination and was completely disabled, unreleased to work by his doctor, and was unable to regularly attend his job. Thus, because the Court concluded that regular attendance is an “essential function” of being a stockbroker, as it is for most jobs, it determined that the Plaintiff was not “otherwise qualified” for his position and denied his claim.