Search for: "Augustus v. ABM Security Services, Inc."
Results 21 - 40
of 47
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 Jan 2017, 4:47 pm
ABM Security Services, Inc. [read post]
Augustus v. ABM: Cal. Supreme Court Clarifies Employers’ Obligation to Provide Duty-Free Rest Breaks
4 Jan 2017, 8:33 pm
ABM Security Services, Inc., __ Cal. 4th __, 2016 WL 7407328 (Cal. [read post]
3 Jan 2017, 1:48 pm
Background Of The Case The plaintiffs worked as security guards for ABM Security Services, Inc. [read post]
30 Dec 2016, 4:41 pm
In Augustus v. [read post]
29 Dec 2016, 5:22 am
ABM Security Services, Inc., December 22, 2016, Cuellar, M.). [read post]
28 Dec 2016, 4:30 pm
ABM Security Services, Inc., the California Supreme Court determined that employers are prohibited from implementing “on-call” rest breaks. [read post]
27 Dec 2016, 3:41 pm
ABM Security Services, Inc. [read post]
27 Dec 2016, 10:20 am
ABM Security Services, Inc., affirming a $90 million judgment for the plaintiff class of security guards on their rest break claim. [read post]
23 Dec 2016, 1:46 pm
ABM Security Services, Inc., affirming a $90 million judgment for the plaintiff class of security guards on their rest break claim. [read post]
22 Dec 2016, 12:23 pm
ABM Security Services, Inc. [read post]
22 Dec 2016, 11:34 am
” Background ABM Security Services, Inc. [read post]
12 Oct 2016, 7:54 am
ABM Security Services Inc., S224853. [read post]
22 Sep 2016, 12:01 pm
ABM Security Services, Inc., 233 Cal. [read post]
26 May 2015, 2:31 pm
ABM Security Services, Inc. [read post]
7 May 2015, 4:00 am
ABM Security Services, Inc., 233 Cal.App.4th 1065 (2014), review granted. [read post]
4 May 2015, 11:11 am
ABM Security Services, Inc., which reversed a near-$90 million judgment awarded in the favor of a certified class of current and former security guards on rest period claims, and also held that while “an on-call guard must return to duty if called to do so, [] remaining available to work is not the same as actually working. [read post]
4 May 2015, 11:11 am
ABM Security Services, Inc., which reversed a near-$90 million judgment awarded in the favor of a certified class of current and former security guards on rest period claims, and also held that while “an on-call guard must return to duty if called to do so, [] remaining available to work is not the same as actually working. [read post]
30 Apr 2015, 8:31 am
ABM Security Services, Inc. [read post]
21 Apr 2015, 8:00 am
ABM Security Services, Inc., --- Cal.App.4th --- (1/29/2015), the plaintiff, Augustus, worked as a security guard for the defendant, ABM. [read post]
24 Feb 2015, 2:30 pm
On December 31, 2014, in a closely-watched case implicating substantive wage-and-hour law as well as class action law, the California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, reversed orders granting summary judgment and summary adjudication in favor of a plaintiff class of security guards for rest break violations under the California Labor Code, and affirmed the [...] [read post]
