A California bill that would require large employers to file with the state government annual pay-data reports with information sorted by race, ethnicity and sex has cleared a key hurdle. Now the state Assembly must decide the bill’s fate.

Does California’s stringent independent-contractor test apply retroactively or only to new misclassification claims? The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals withdrew its recent decision on the matter and asked the California Supreme Court to weigh in.

Thanks to recent negotiations among state lawmakers, it appears that California employers may get a temporary reprieve on some of the more sweeping data-privacy requirements that were set to take effect in just a few short months.

A 21 percent service charge added by a banquet hall operator to the facility’s food and beverage bills may be a gratuity, which California law requires to go to nonmanagerial employees who serve food and beverages, a California appellate court ruled.

California has join New York City to become the first state to protect employees from discrimination based on natural hair and hairstyles associated with race.

A former deputy district attorney claims that his employer retaliated against him after he insisted that a criminal defendant who was on trial for murder was innocent. A California appellate court recently ruled that the plaintiff can proceed to trial with his whistle-blower claim.

In a unanimous decision, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals resuscitated class claims against retail giants Nike and Converse that allege employees are owed compensation for time spent undergoing security checks when exiting the retail stores.

On June 27, Gov. Gavin Newson signed SB 83, which will extend the maximum duration of paid family leave (PFL) benefits from six to eight weeks beginning on July 1, 2020.

Laws enabling employees to work for direct competitors help drive California’s economy. However, departing employees must leave their former employer in a way that is fair and lawful. Here’s a road map for departing employees and the companies hiring them, particularly in competitive fields.

After receiving more than 40 public comments and holding a public meeting on its proposed wildfire smoke emergency regulation, California’s Division of Occupational Safety and Health (which is known as Cal/OSHA) has eased some of the proposed requirements.