Publications
-
COVID-19 Liability Claims Playbooks – Now Available for Download!
August 6, 2020
-
The California Edition of the Employment & Labor Newsletter
Trends & Change California
April 2017
-
The California Edition of the Employment & Labor Newsletter
Trends & Change California
January 2017
-
The California Edition of the Employment & Labor Newsletter
Trends & Change California
August 2016
-
The California Edition of the Employment & Labor Newsletter
Trends & Change California
June 2016
-
The California Edition of the Employment & Labor Newsletter
Trends & Change California
April 2016
-
Looking Beyond the Controversy Surrounding the Issuance of the EEOC’s Guidance on Pregnancy Discrimination
Aspatore Thought Leadership Employment Law 2015: Top Lawyers on Trends and Key Strategies for the Upcoming Year
February 1, 2015
-
Time to Dust off and Polish Best Practices
Litigation Management
Summer 2013
-
Employment Newsletter
Challenges to NLRB Authority after Recess Appointments
February 2013
-
California Employers Need to Evaluate Meal and Rest Break Policies
April 24, 2012
Because the California Supreme Court has provided some specific guidance regarding employers’ obligations in reference to meal and rest breaks, it is very important that employers review their policies and practices to ensure they are in compliance with the requirements set forth in a recent decision. -
Employment Newsletter
Recent EEOC Regulations
January 2012
The EEOC’s proposed regulations are intended to clarify the “reasonable factors other than age” (RFOA) defense to a disparate impact claim. It is critical that employers considering work force reductions or changes in policies that may have a negative impact on older workers be aware of these regulations and engage in an appropriate analysis to allow effective utilization of the RFOA defense provided by the Supreme Court if faced with a disparate impact claim based upon age.
-
Supreme Court upholds the "nerve center" test to determine a corporation's "principal place of business" for the purposes of diversity jurisdiction and rejects the Ninth Circuit's amount of "business activities" test
March 2010
On February 23, 2010, the United States Supreme Court in Hertz Corp. v. Friend, et. al., unanimously held that a corporation's "principal place of business" for the purposes of federal diversity jurisdiction shall be determined by the "nerve center" test. This refers to the corporation's center of direction, control and coordination, as opposed to the "business activities" test used in the Ninth Circuit and elsewhere.
-
California Employment Newsletter
California Employment
September 2009
This California Employment newsletter discusses employment claims on the rise, employee's waiver of class action rights, an interview with Debra Mellinkoff, a prominent California employment mediator, and more.
Additional Publications
Contributor, BNA Employment Discrimination, Fourth Edition – 2009 Supplement, Chapter 37, “‘Reverse’ Discrimination and Affirmative Action”
Contributor, BNA Employment Discrimination, Fourth Edition – 2010 Supplement, Chapter 24, “Charging Parties and Plaintiffs”