- Written by Rebecca Hause-Schultz
On August 21, 2017, the First Appellate District in California issued a decision in OTO, LLC. v. Ken Kho, granting a car dealership’s petition to compel arbitration in litigation with its former employee. In that case, employee Kho filed a claim for unpaid wages with the California Labor Commissioner (“Commissioner”) against his former employer, OTO, LLC, doing business as One Toyota of Oakland (“employer”). When employees seek resolution of claims through the labor commissioner, those claims may be resolved either through settlement, through an informal “Berman” hearing, or through the commissioner’s direct prosecution of the action. A Berman hearing is an administrative hearing conducted by the Commissioner to review a wage claim. It is intended to be a speedy, informal, and affordable method for employees to resolve a wage claim.
- Written by Gregory Blueford
Court Dismisses Lawsuit Alleging AB 1513 Payments Were Unlawful
By: Gregory Blueford
On August 9, 2017, the United States District Court for the Central District dismissed a lawsuit against the Secretary of the California Labor and Workforce Development Agency, the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations and the California Labor Commissioner (“Defendants”) challenging the constitutionality of AB 1513’s safe harbor provision. As employers know, the AB 1513 safe harbor allowed employers to choose to pay either the actual sums owed or 4% of the employee’s gross earnings in pay periods where any piece rate was worked with offsets allowed for nonproductive time (“NPT”) already paid – even if this was less than the actual sums owed. Plaintiffs, who sought to represent all non-exempt piece-rate agricultural workers in California, argued that the State of California violated the U.S. Constitution by allowing employers to utilize the 4% method to settle employee claims for less than the amounts actually owed to Plaintiffs.