In Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc., the California Supreme Court held that even when an employee enters into an arbitration agreement requiring the employee to arbitrate only their individual claims, the employee still has a right to continue to pursue remedies under California’s Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA), if they are able to win on their individual claims in arbitration. The California Supreme Court was quick to overturn the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana issued last summer, which provided employers with some hope to limit PAGA litigation. Here are five key issues California employers must understand about the issues in the Uber decision:
1. Quick refresher on the California’s Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”).
PAGA was enacted in 2004 to authorize aggrieved employees to file lawsuits against employers on behalf of themselves, other employees, and the State of California for Labor Code violations. PAGA allows aggrieved employees to act as a “Private Attorneys General” to seek remedies against their employer not only for the violations committed against them, but also to recover any violations committed by their employer against other employees. The plaintiff’s ability to bring claims on behalf of other employees is referred to as “non-individual claims.”
California’s PAGA was designed by the California Legislature to offer financial incentives to private individuals to enforce state labor laws to recover certain...
Albert Manifold claims he was ‘removed without warning or explanation’ Former BP chairman Albert Manifold has strongly rejected what he described as “false allegations” about his conduct following ...