Search for: "United States v. Division of Labor Law Enforcement, Department of Industrial Relations, California"
Results 21 - 40
of 51
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Dec 2019, 9:55 am
The Alternative Borello Test According to the website of the California Department of Industrial Relations: “For most matters before the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE), depending on the remedial nature of the legislation at issue, this means applying the “multi-factor” or the “economic realities” test adopted by the California Supreme Court in the case of S. [read post]
30 May 2019, 8:11 am
United States, 18-7739. [read post]
23 May 2019, 7:12 am
United States, United States v. [read post]
20 Dec 2018, 9:22 am
Selikoff arrived in Los Angeles, California, from Sydney, Australia, on the S.S. [read post]
15 Dec 2018, 7:41 am
Even if the Justice Department does not step up to defend Obamacare, it is likely that states like California that have intervened in support of the ACA in the litigation will attempt to appeal the action. [read post]
1 Oct 2018, 11:13 am
Adds Article 4 (commencing with Section 1700.50) to Chapter 4 of Part 6 of Division 2 of the Labor Code. [read post]
6 Sep 2018, 8:03 am
Note that this rule does not affect the new permissible exposure limits (PELs) for general industry, construction, and shipyards, or the general industry provisions for exposure assessment, respiratory protection, medical surveillance, and medical removal, which OSHA began enforcing on May 11, 2018. [read post]
9 Aug 2018, 2:37 pm
” Court dismisses most of Trump Administration’s challenges to California state immigration laws After concluding that the Trump Administration is not likely to succeed on the merits of its Supremacy Clause claims against two California immigration-related laws (S.B. 54 and A.B. 103) and the notice requirement provision of a third (A.B. 450), a federal district court in California has granted the state’s motion… [read post]
6 May 2018, 8:35 pm
California “gig” workers may be. [read post]
16 Mar 2018, 3:42 pm
“ ‘The supremacy clause of the United States Constitution establishes a constitutional choice-of-law rule, makes federal law paramount, and vests Congress with the power to preempt state law. [read post]
24 Jan 2017, 4:50 pm
If you feel you have been retaliated against, please feel free to contact any of the above-listed law firms or the California Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Labor Standards Enforcement at: http://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/HowToFileRetaliationComplaint.htm The post Quintilone & Associates reaches a Class Action settlement with Sprint over Unpaid Wages appeared first on Quintilone &… [read post]
23 Sep 2016, 7:21 am
Should the Department look to the State of California’s law (requiring that 50 percent of an employee’s time be spent exclusively on work that is the employee’s primary duty) as a model? [read post]
8 Jan 2016, 5:30 am
Baker et. al., Plaintiff Angelotti and other lien claimants sued the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) and others, alleging that the lien activation fees under Labor Code §4903.6 violated the U.S. [read post]
28 Dec 2015, 9:37 am
EFFECT: This law is a legislative overturning of a California Court of Appeal decision (Rope v. [read post]
28 Dec 2015, 9:37 am
EFFECT: This law is a legislative overturning of a California Court of Appeal decision (Rope v. [read post]
28 Dec 2015, 6:03 am
EFFECT: This law is a legislative overturning of a California Court of Appeal decision (Rope v. [read post]
27 Nov 2015, 9:39 am
Virginia – used the power of judicial review to raise the professional standards of American public administrators in the fields of education, law enforcement, electoral administration, and family law. [read post]
31 Dec 2012, 3:29 pm
Noah Kravitz), LinkedIn (Eagle v. [read post]
31 Dec 2012, 3:29 pm
Noah Kravitz), LinkedIn (Eagle v. [read post]
26 Nov 2011, 4:46 pm
Legacy Health SystemCourt: U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Docket: 10-72478 November 21, 2011 Judge: Smith Areas of Law: Contracts, Labor & Employment Law The NLRB petitioned for enforcement of its order finding that Legacy Health violated sections 8(a)(1) and (3) of the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. 158(a)(1) and (3) by not allowing its employees to simultaneously hold bargaining unit positions and… [read post]
