The majority of these changes are the result of a bill known as AB 1228. This law repealed the 2022 Fast Food Accountability and Standards Recovery Act (FAST Recovery Act) and replaced it with new legislation that reflects negotiations between restaurant labor and employers in 2023. The new legislation applies to national fast food chains, which it defines as “limited-service restaurants consisting of more than 60 establishments nationally that share a common brand, or that are characterized by standardized options for decor, marketing, packaging, products, and services, and which are primarily engaged in providing food and beverages for immediate consumption.”
As a result, employees in the industry will receive substantial new rights and benefits beginning as early as April 1, 2024. Let’s break down the biggest benefits of the bill, how it could impact you, and what to do if your employer doesn’t respect your rights at work.
California law AB 1228, set to take effect this year, will significantly increase wages for fast food workers at covered businesses in the state. Beginning on April 1, 2024, the minimum wage for California’s approximately 500,000 fast-food workers will be raised to $20 per hour. This is a notable increase from the average hourly wage of $16.21 for fast-food workers in 2022, significantly improving the earnings and potential quality of life for workers in the restaurant industry across California.
Furthermore, the Fast Food Council, established under AB 1228, will start determining annual increases in the minimum wage for covered employees from January 1, 2025, until 2029. This will be done using a specified formula, ensuring that wages may continue to rise based on calculated needs and economic conditions. This approach aims to balance the interests of workers seeking fair compensation with the operational realities of fast food businesses.
While the specific wage rates set by the Council will directly determine the impact on employees’ wages, the Act represents a legislative move towards potentially increasing wages above the statewide minimum wage for workers in this sector. The law aims to provide employees with a stronger say in setting minimum wages and working conditions, including health and safety standards.
The Fast Food Council is intended to represent all interests in the industry. It will consist of nine members, which must include franchise owners, restaurant employees, advocates for employees, and a neutral chairperson to break deadlocks. Overall, the Council is tasked with setting minimum standards for workers in the fast-food industry.
These standards cover various elements of employment, including wages, working conditions related to health and safety, and security in employment. The Council will not have the power to implement policies on its own; however, it will recommend workplace standards to state agencies, which will then investigate and potentially implement these standards to improve conditions for all.
Overall, this initiative is part of California’s broader efforts to regulate working conditions and wages for fast-food workers, reflecting the state’s commitment to improving labor conditions in this sector. The establishment of the Council marks a proactive step towards addressing wage disparities and improving the economic conditions of casual and fast dining workers, who are often among the lowest-paid workers in the economy.
While the full impact of AB 1228 and the Fast Food Council is yet to be seen, the increase in the minimum wage for many restaurant workers is a guarantee. Still, even the best employment laws only protect you if you know your rights and advocate for yourself. If your employer doesn’t pay you the appropriate minimum wage once April begins, you may need to take legal action to receive the wages you’re owed. Here’s what you can do to ensure your employer respects your new rights:
It’s important to act promptly, as there may be statutes of limitations on wage claims, limiting the amount of time you have to file a complaint after the wage violation occurs.
Fast food employees play a crucial role in the economy, providing valuable services to communities across the country. Ensuring they are fairly compensated and treated with respect in the workplace is not just a legal obligation but a moral one. If your employer fails to pay you the appropriate minimum wage as of April 1, 2024, they are violating your right to fair compensation, and you may have the right to compensation.
At the Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman, P.C., our experienced employment law attorneys are available to help you with unpaid wage claims and other workplace disputes. Schedule your consultation with our California employment law firm to learn more about how we can help you fight for fair pay under AB 1228.
]]>However, some groups are not enthused about how AB 5 has impacted businesses. In fact, some companies have banded together with state legislators to attempt to have the law repealed. If this occurs, it could seriously threaten California workers’ right to fair employment classification. Here’s what you need to know about AB 5, how it protects you, the controversies the bill continues to face, and what you can do to ensure you receive fair treatment at work.
Signed into law in September 2019 and taking effect on January 1, 2020, AB 5 codified and expanded the California Supreme Court’s 2018 decision in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles. This ruling introduced the “ABC” test to determine whether workers should be classified as employees or independent contractors.
According to the ABC test, for a worker to be considered an independent contractor, the hiring entity must prove three things:
The implementation of AB 5 has sparked a significant debate among various stakeholders. Proponents argue that the law protects workers from exploitation by ensuring access to employment benefits and protections, including minimum wage, overtime, unemployment insurance, and workers’ compensation.
Critics, however, contend that AB 5 imposes rigid constraints on the gig economy, stifling flexibility and innovation. Many independent contractors express concern that the law could force them into traditional employment roles, stripping them of the autonomy and flexibility that define freelance work. Additionally, businesses argue that the increased operational costs due to reclassifying workers as employees could lead to higher prices for consumers and potentially the downsizing of their workforce.
Since its inception, AB 5 has faced a slew of legal challenges, particularly from gig economy giants like Uber and Lyft, which argue that the law fundamentally misunderstands the nature of their business models. The pushback has led to legislative amendments and court rulings that have exempted certain professions from the law’s requirements or adjusted its application.
Moreover, Proposition 22, a ballot initiative passed in November 2020, allowed app-based transportation and delivery companies to classify their drivers as independent contractors, albeit with some concessions regarding benefits. This outcome highlighted the contentious and complex nature of labor laws in the modern economy.
Finally, as recently as January 2024, the fight to repeal AB5 and reduce workers’ rights continued. California Assemblywoman Kate Sanchez, R-Rancho Santa Margarita, announced her intent to file a new bill to repeal AB 5 statewide. While the bill is a long shot, it demonstrates that the fight for fair employment in the gig economy is far from over.
For the moment, AB 5 remains the law of the land in California. If you want to protect your right to fair employment classification, you need to understand the law and know how to respond if your employer violates your rights. Here’s what you can do to make sure you receive fair classification in the workplace:
First and foremost, you must understand the ABC test, which AB 5 uses to determine employment status. Understanding the criteria of this test helps you assess whether you might be incorrectly classified as an independent contractor when you should be an employee with access to benefits and protections.
Under California law, employees are entitled to various benefits and protections that independent contractors are not. These include minimum wage, overtime pay, unemployment insurance, workers’ compensation, sick leave, and more. Knowing these rights can help you spot when you’re being denied benefits you’re entitled to.
Maintain detailed records of your work hours, communications with the company you’re working for, and any contracts or agreements made. This documentation can be crucial if you need to challenge your classification or seek legal recourse.
If you believe there’s a discrepancy in your classification, start by discussing your concerns with your employer. Sometimes, misclassification is unintentional and can be resolved internally once brought to the employer’s attention.
If you believe you’ve been misclassified and cannot resolve the issue with your employer, you can file a complaint with the California Labor Commissioner’s Office. This step can initiate an investigation into your employment status and potentially lead to the correction of your classification and compensation for any benefits or protections you were denied.
In cases where an employer persistently violates the law, seeking legal counsel may be necessary. Employment lawyers can offer advice, represent you in disputes, and help navigate the complexities of labor law to ensure your rights are protected.
AB 5 represents a significant shift in the way labor laws are applied to the gig economy, aiming to protect workers but also sparking controversy and debate about the nature of work and employment in the 21st century. While the law remains in place, it’s crucial to understand and fight for your right to fair classification. If you believe you’ve been misclassified by your employer, the Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman, P.C., can help. Schedule your consultation with our skilled employee misclassification lawyers to learn more.
]]>This is a substantial move to dismantle long-standing barriers to fair compensation. It also has the benefit of being tried and tested elsewhere in the country – California has had similar regulations in place for most employers since 2018. Let’s look at how the new federal hiring rule will protect potential employees, the benefits it offers, and what workers can do if they believe their rights were violated during the hiring process.
The OPM has finalized its rule regarding hiring new federal employees, stating that “federal agencies cannot consider an applicant’s non-federal salary history when setting pay for new federal employees.” Specifically, agencies cannot use prior pay at positions outside of federal service to set pay for new or returning hires.
Similarly, the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Council has released a similar proposal that would set new rules for all federal contractors and subcontractors operating primarily in the US. The Council’s proposal would bar covered contractors from requesting salary histories from prospective employees to determine compensation. Furthermore, even if a candidate volunteers this information, the contractors may not apply the information when setting compensation rates.
While the proposal has not yet been approved, it demonstrates the federal government’s ongoing commitment to protect all workers and act as a model employer for the nation. These actions are part of efforts to ensure fair compensation based on skills and experience, aiming to improve recruitment and job satisfaction and reduce turnover among federal workers and contractors.
These federal directives may have taken inspiration and guidance from similar directives that have been in place in California. The state’s Labor Code section 432.3 offers protections to workers by barring employers from asking about salary history. First brought into effect in 2018 by AB 2282, the law introduced several critical provisions aimed at reducing hiring discrimination:
As with the federal rules, California’s salary history law is intended to encourage wage equity by compelling companies to base offers on the job’s worth and the candidate’s abilities, helping to break the cycle of pay discrimination.
Barring employers from considering prospective employees’ prior pay during the hiring process is supposed to help reduce wage disparities and promote pay equity. This approach is intended to guarantee that salary offers are based on the role’s requirements, the candidate’s experience, skills, and the value they bring to the company, rather than their past compensation, which may have been influenced by discriminatory practices or pay inequalities. Theoretically, it benefits women and minorities, who historically have faced greater wage gaps, by offering a fair chance at receiving competitive salaries that reflect their qualifications and contributions.
The question is: does the practice actually work? While the federal rules are too new to have had a serious impact, California’s laws have much more support, and the answer is clear. Yes, prohibiting the consideration of prior pay during hiring benefits historically disadvantaged people.
Since its implementation, California Labor Code section 432.3 has had a significant impact on hiring practices within the state. Employers have had to revise their application and interview processes to comply with the new regulations, leading to more equitable hiring practices. By focusing on qualifications and job requirements rather than salary history, the law aims to narrow the wage gap and combat systemic discrimination.
Furthermore, the requirement for pay scale transparency empowers job applicants, providing them with crucial information to make informed decisions and negotiate fair compensation. This shift not only benefits individual workers but also promotes broader societal change towards wage equality and workplace diversity.
The OPM and FAR rules echo California’s AB 2282 and Labor Code section 432.3 in many ways, which is excellent news for workers. These bills and regulations mark a pivotal moment in the effort to eliminate hiring discrimination and promote equity in the workplace. By banning salary history inquiries and enhancing pay scale transparency, this legislation paves the way for fairer, more inclusive hiring practices.
Of course, laws only work if they are followed. It’s crucial for people protected by California and federal hiring requirements to understand their rights. If you believe that you have experienced discriminatory hiring or wage practices, you should discuss your case with an experienced employment attorney to learn if you can take legal action.
At the Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman, P.C., our skilled attorneys can help. We are prepared to represent you in hiring and pay discrimination cases in California and around the country. Learn more about how we can help you fight for the fair pay you deserve by scheduling your consultation today.
]]>In 2021, for example, the landmark Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act was passed on the federal level, barring employers from enforcing arbitration clauses for these claims. In contrast, in 2023, the California Supreme Court reversed its prior precedents and permitted employers to make signing arbitration clauses a condition of employment.
While the state Supreme Court’s ruling has been controversial, a recent Second District Court of Appeals ruling has softened the blow to workers. As of January 29, 2024, the appellate court has confirmed that the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act applies retroactively in California. In short, California employers cannot require you to attend arbitration if you’ve filed a sexual harassment claim. Let’s break down how the Act and the appellate court’s decision protect your rights and what they mean for you.
The federal Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act (EFASASHA) of 2021 represents a pivotal change in employment law, offering new protections for employees facing sexual assault and harassment in the workplace. This groundbreaking legislation prohibits employers from mandating arbitration for these specific types of claims, allowing employees the option to take their cases to court instead. Historically, arbitration clauses in employment contracts have compelled employees to resolve such disputes privately, away from the public eye, and often without the opportunity for appeal.
The enactment of this law was a significant victory for advocates of workers’ rights and survivors of sexual misconduct. It underscores a societal acknowledgment of the need for greater transparency and accountability in addressing these serious issues within the workplace. By removing the veil of forced arbitration, the Act paves the way for more open and public adjudication of sexual harassment and assault allegations, which can lead to a more just outcome for survivors.
As with many federal laws, the true extent of EFASASHA’s impact has taken time to be determined. All laws are subject to judicial review. If the courts find that a law is unconstitutional or contradicts another, higher authority, they may invalidate that law by setting new precedents in their rulings. However, they may also confirm and empower laws through their decisions, such as by determining if a given regulation should be interpreted broadly or narrowly.
That brings us to the California ruling that affirmed California’s stance on forced arbitration for sexual assault in the workplace. The case Kader v. Southern California Medical Center Inc. (2024) involved the plaintiff, Omar Kader, filing a lawsuit against his employer for sexual harassment and assault. After the enactment of EFASASHA, Kader sued, challenging a prior arbitration agreement. The initial ruling was appealed and brought before the Second District Court of Appeals for California. In a published ruling, the appellate court declared that the arbitration agreement was invalid under the new law because the dispute arose after the agreement and the Act’s effective date, affirming the trial court’s denial of the motion to compel arbitration.
This case clarified several things for California employers and employees alike. First, it set the precedent that state courts would enforce EFASASHA broadly. Second, it explained that the courts would consider the Act to apply retroactively so that it would cover even voluntary arbitration agreements signed prior to 2021. In other words, the Second District Court of Appeals made it clear that forced arbitration will not be acceptable or permitted for sexual assault and harassment cases in California.
Employees stand to gain significantly from the Kader ruling. By removing the constraint of forced arbitration, it opens up the possibility of pursuing claims in a public forum, offering a chance for a more transparent judicial process and potentially broader remedies. Furthermore, the Act serves as a deterrent against workplace sexual misconduct, encouraging employers to take proactive measures to prevent harassment and assault.
In other words, California’s stance toward EFASASHA gives workers an empowered choice in how to pursue justice. It opens the door to potentially more favorable public court systems, where the rules of evidence are stricter, and the right to an appeal exists.
This is excellent news for workers. The process of a public trial ensures greater transparency and fairness and often leads to larger settlements for victims of assault and abuse. Conversely, arbitration can limit workers’ rights. The confidential nature, limited discovery, and lack of appeals potentially favor employers due to repetitive engagements with arbitrators and prevent workers from seeking outside help. The Kader ruling ensures that all employees in California can seek a fair trial for sexual assault allegations without being forced into silence through arbitration.
In conclusion, the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021 marks a critical advancement in protecting workers’ rights and ensuring justice for victims of sexual misconduct in the workplace. The Kader ruling shows that California courts recognize exactly how important this is to workers’ rights after facing harassment and assault at work.
If you’ve faced harassment or sexual assault at work, you can now file a civil lawsuit against your employer in confidence. The experienced employment attorneys at the Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman, P.C., can help. We are dedicated to fighting for victims of harassment in the workplace and helping them achieve fair compensation for the harm they’ve suffered.
Don’t hesitate to get help if you’ve been harassed or assaulted, even if you’re subject to an arbitration agreement. Instead, schedule a consultation with our proven lawyers to learn more about how we can help you hold your employer accountable for harming you through a public trial.
]]>However, filing a successful claim can be a complex process. Keep reading to learn how Equal Pay Act claims differ from other workplace discrimination allegations, how to file a claim, and the benefits of working with a skilled employment attorney like those at the Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman, P.C.
The Equal Pay Act (EPA), passed in 1963, is a federal law designed to ensure that employees receive equal compensation for equal work. This means that regardless of gender, employees must be paid the same wage for jobs that require substantially similar skill, effort, and responsibility under similar working conditions.
It’s important to note that the EPA is not the same as the Civil Rights Act, despite many similarities. The EPA only addresses claims based on gender. If someone is being paid less than their colleagues due to their race or religion, they may file a claim under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act instead.
Under the EPA, pay discrimination is based on gender, which includes discrimination against both men and women. Compensation discrimination is more than just differences in salary; it encompasses all aspects of compensation, such as wages, bonuses, benefits, and overtime.
But what is an example of a violation of the EPA? If you’re earning less than someone of the opposite sex for performing substantially similar work, it could be considered discrimination under this act. There are many possible examples of compensation discrimination, such as:
If any of these issues sound familiar, you may be facing unlawful wage discrimination.
Not everyone is eligible to file an EPA claim. To ensure that your case is valid, certain criteria must be met:
If you meet these three criteria, you may be eligible to file a claim against your employer. However, you can consult an attorney to discuss your eligibility if you are still unsure.
Now that you understand the fundamentals of the EPA and who can file a claim, let’s delve into the process of filing a claim if you believe you are a victim of wage discrimination.
The first step in filing a claim is to document the wage disparity. Keep records of your pay, your colleagues’ compensation (especially those in substantially similar roles), and any relevant information that might help support your claim. This evidence will be crucial in building your case.
Seeking professional legal counsel is highly recommended when dealing with EPA claims. The Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman, P.C., offers in-depth expertise in discrimination cases and can provide valuable guidance and support throughout the process. They can help you understand the legal nuances, build a strong case, and navigate the complex legal system.
Before taking legal action, discussing your concerns with your company’s HR department is often beneficial. They may be unaware of the wage discrepancy and could take steps to address the issue internally.
Suppose your discussions with HR do not yield satisfactory results. In that case, you can file a complaint with the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) or the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). It’s crucial to adhere to these organizations’ specific guidelines and deadlines.
If your claim remains unresolved, your attorney can help you initiate a lawsuit against your employer. This legal action can seek compensation for the discrimination you have experienced and potential damages.
If you’re an employee in California facing pay discrimination, the Equal Pay Act provides a strong legal framework to address these issues. Remember, seeking professional legal counsel is essential to represent your claim effectively. By following the steps outlined in this guide, you can take action to rectify pay discrimination and work towards achieving compensation equality in your workplace.However, navigating the complexities of the Equal Pay Act and pursuing wage equality can be challenging. That’s where experienced legal counsel, such as the Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman, P.C., comes into play. Our team of professionals is well-versed in California pay equality laws and has a successful track record in handling pay discrimination cases. Schedule your consultation with our wage and hour workplace discrimination lawyers to learn how we can assist you with your claim.
]]>We are thrilled to extend our heartfelt congratulations to Todd M. Friedman, the managing partner of Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman, P.C., for his exceptional achievement of being selected to the Super Lawyers list for the fifth consecutive year.
This prestigious recognition is a testament to Mr. Friedman’s unwavering commitment to legal excellence, dedication to his clients, and outstanding contributions to the legal profession. Super Lawyers, a Thomson Reuters service, annually recognizes outstanding lawyers who have demonstrated exceptional skill and achieved noteworthy success in their respective fields.
Mr. Friedman’s consistent presence on the Super Lawyers list showcases not only his legal prowess but also his ongoing commitment to providing top-notch legal representation to his clients. With a focus on consumer protection and employment law, Todd M. Friedman has become a trusted advocate for those seeking justice and fairness in the face of legal challenges.
Achieving this recognition for five consecutive years is a remarkable feat that speaks volumes about Mr. Friedman’s professionalism, ethical standards, and the positive impact he has made in the legal community. His dedication to achieving favorable outcomes for his clients and upholding the highest standards of the legal profession has undoubtedly set him apart.
As a managing partner of the Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman, P.C., Mr. Friedman has built a reputation for his tenacity and commitment to advocating for the rights of individuals facing legal challenges. His expertise, combined with a passion for justice, has earned him the trust and respect of clients and peers alike.
This milestone achievement not only reflects Todd M. Friedman’s individual success but also underscores the excellence that defines the Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman, P.C. The entire legal team shares in this celebration, recognizing the collective dedication to providing outstanding legal services.
As we congratulate Todd M. Friedman on this well-deserved honor, we also express our gratitude for his continued commitment to legal excellence, tireless advocacy, and the positive impact he has made on the legal landscape. Here’s to many more years of success and recognition for Todd M. Friedman and the Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman, P.C.!