Photo of Employment Law Observer Peter J. Felsenfeld
Partner
pfelsenfeld@hinshawlaw.com
415-743-3724
View Bio
Peter Felsenfeld has a diverse litigation practice representing businesses, individuals and insurance companies in complex litigation matters. He …

Showing 42 posts by Peter J. Felsenfeld.

Employer’s Arbitration Agreement Passes Muster

In Peng v. First Republic Bank, the California Court of Appeal for the First Appellate District rejected an employee’s contention that a company’s standard arbitration agreement was unconscionable.

Peng stands for the proposition that most boilerplate arbitration agreements contained in employment contracts will be upheld unless the employer enforces them in bad faith. For example, an employer may not unilaterally modify an agreement after an employee has filed a claim. More ›

Obamacare Small Business Exchange Delayed

Mounting technical delays are complicating the implementation of the Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare.

The website Politico is reporting that the Obama Administration intends to delay a portion of Obamacare aimed at small businesses.

The delay involves online enrollment for small business health exchanges run by the federal government known as “SHOP” exchanges, Politico reports.  Enrollment was scheduled to start on October 1, 2013.  Small businesses will now have to wait until November to enroll online, though paper enrollment is still an option. More ›

Are You Ready For Obamacare’s Employee Notice Requirements?

An important deadline for employers regarding the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare, is just around the corner.

By October 1, 2013, employers must notify employees of the coverage options available on health insurance marketplaces or exchanges. The requirement applies to companies with one or more employees and not less than $500,000 in annual business — in other words most employers. More ›

No Anti-SLAPP Protection for Statements to Coworkers

In Cho v. Chang, the California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District held that an employee’s statements to coworkers about alleged discrimination were not protected activities triggering special protection under California’s anti-SLAPP statute.

The court further held that an anti-SLAPP motion can be granted as to protected activities and denied as to unprotected activities combined within the same cause of action. More ›

Proposed Employer tax Rules Available for Obamacare

The U.S. Department of the Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service have published proposed rules establishing reporting requirements for employers and insurers under the Affordable Care Act (“ACA”), or Obamacare.

Under the ACA, employers with 50 or more full-time employees must offer health insurance or pay a penalty. The new proposed rules flesh out how employers must report information to the IRS with respect to their employees’ enrollment in qualified health plans. More ›

It just got Easier to Remove Class Actions

In Rodriguez v. AT&T Mobility Services LLC the Ninth Circuit cited recent United States Supreme Court precedent to make it more difficult for class action plaintiffs to pursue their claims in state court. More ›

Employee must Exhaust Administrative Remedies Before Suing Employer

In MacDonald v. Superior Court, the court held that an employee must exhaust statutory administrative remedies before filing suit against an employer.

MacDonald worked for the State of California and the California State Assembly in San Joaquin County. According to his complaint, MacDonald was fired two weeks after complaining that a supervisor had been smoking in the office in violation of the Labor Code and Government Code. More ›

Use of Criminal Background Checks Upheld by Federal Judge

In a rebuke to the Obama Administration, a federal judge has held that an employer may use criminal history as a hiring criterion without violating a job applicant’s civil rights.

The case, EEOC v. Freeman, centers around a recent Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) policy that employers may run afoul of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by conducting criminal background checks. As we have reported, the EEOC maintains that such checks have a disproportionate adverse impact on minorities. More ›

Despite Sovereign Status Indian Tribe Must Follow NLRA

In a decision that could have ripple effects nationwide, the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”) has held that federal labor protections apply to an Indian tribe’s casino operations in Oklahoma.

Workers at the Winstar World Casino, in conjunction with the Teamsters, initiated the NLRB action because the Chickasaw Nation, a federally recognize tribe, refused to follow the National Labor Relations Act (the “NLRA”). The tribe argued that the NLRA should not apply because of the tribe’s sovereign status. More ›

Arbitrator’s Award Given Preclusive Effect in Racial Discrimination Case

In Wade v. Ports America Management Corp., the California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District held that an arbitration award, pursuant to a collective bargaining agreement, had res judicata effect on a plaintiff’s subsequent common law racial discrimination claim.

Wade, an African-American longshoreman, was laid off in September of 2008, even though he had more seniority than other employees who were retained. The effective collective bargaining agreement (CBA) required union members to submit any grievances related to their employment to binding arbitration. More ›