Steps Employees Should Take When Expecting a Layoff

Washington may be selling the idea that we are in a new economy, but there are several companies still trying to recover from the bad economic condition of the country. As a result, the unemployment scenario in California has not subsided even a bit. In fact, the rate of unemployment in California presently is 12%, and the chances of hiring are also considerably low, as around 63% of the small businesses have closed their hiring process for some time to come.

If you are an employee with one of these companies and are expecting to get laid off, you must consider doing the following things:
#1: Secure all letters of reference, performance evaluations and letters of commendation that have a mention of the landmark projects that you have done for the company. It’s also great to have a count of expense reductions that you may have got for your company and the goals that you may have achieved in terms of revenue generated. Have your back-up data ready!

#2: Keeping this data handy can be of great help to you. First, because you will be reminded of your achievements and you will realize your true value. Second, because asking your manager to provide this information will also remind them of your contribution to the team and company. Lastly, you can furnish this information to the interview board for lay-off and can actually avoid that situation from arising. If you come to know that the company is laying off people and your name is a part of that list, try to contact management and talk to them about any negotiations that may be possible.

#3: Your company may choose to give you severance pay, in which case the company shall ask you to sign a release. If you sign these papers, you will not be able to make several kinds of labor law claims on the company. Before signing any release papers, you must first show it to a knowledgeable California labor law attorney. Moreover, all of these release papers say that you, as one of the parties, have the right to get the papers reviewed by an attorney.

See even more ways to protect yourself from tricks employers use to get you to quit HERE.

The labor laws in California are rather complex, and before you sign the release papers, it is important for you to understand all your rights. The attorneys of United Employees Law Group can help and you don’t pay unless we win your case. It is also important for you to realize that in getting you to sign the release papers, your employer is not doing you a favor. In fact, you are doing a favor to your employer by signing those papers as you are the one who is at the risk of losing a good amount of money.

Photo Credit: Shutterstock/ GaudiLab

The post Don’t Wait for the AX to FALL: Being Prepared Can Pay Off. appeared first on UELG.

An arbitration ruling has recently been handed down from the U.S. Supreme Court in a case entitled Stolt-Nielsen v. Animal Feeds Int’l Corp.

Arbitrators, over the past several years, have followed U.S. and California Supreme Court rulings which have consistently held that if an arbitration agreement does not allow for class action treatment, then such class action treatment must be allowed.

In stark contradiction, the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in Stolt-Nielsen v. Animal Feeds case, states “[A] party may not be compelled under the FAA to submit to class arbitration unless there is a contractual basis for concluding that the party agreed to do so.” This essentially means that unless the arbitration agreement specifically permits class wide arbitration, none shall be allowed.

This holding is in direct contradiction to the California Supreme Court case entitled Gentry v. Superior Court which held that any arbitration agreement that does not permit class certification is an unenforceable and voidable “exculpatory clause.”

Without a doubt many defense firms in California will attempt to use the recent decision to reshape California law, however this will likely not be successful since Gentry v. Superior Court does not conflict with the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”)  since it applies to all class waiver “exculpatory clauses” whether or not they happen to appear in arbitration agreements.

In addition, the Stolt-Nielsen decision simply holds that, without specifically an express agreement by the parties, class arbitrations cannot be ordered “under the FAA.”   The decision does not state, however, that the FAA preempts Californiacourts from compelling class-wide arbitration under state law, such as the California Arbitration Act or the anti-exculpatory rule discussed in the Gentry case.

It is likely that California courts will still be bound by the Gentry decision and judges are likely to reject any attempt to enforce an exculpatory class-waiver clause since such would conflict with Gentry.

The likely outcome is that defense firms and their clients will not be able to avoid class actions altogether but rather will need to choose between class wide litigation or class wide arbitration.

Photo Credit: Zolnierek

The post Arbitration Ruling Handed Down From the U.S. Supreme Court and California Law appeared first on UELG.

We are all familiar with employee contracts which a person signs once the employer accepts someone to work for him, and the other party (potential employee) also accepts the offer to work. In addition, there is often a second agreement signed between the employer and employee known as an arbitration agreement, the purpose of which is to prevent the employee from taking the employer to court.
One weakness of such agreements is that they are confined to a specific jurisdiction which states that the agreement’s terms are only subjected to that area and deemed invalid when that person is relocated to another state or different jurisdiction. Interestingly, there is debate as to the legality of an arbitration agreement at all, especially in California, as some companies have started including the term which does not allow the employee to take action if he is relocated.
This causes obvious problems as different states and even cities can have vastly different employment laws, and to have a contract based on the rules of a location you no longer work in makes little sense. The National Labor Relations Board stated that the employee is no longer obligated to sign such contracts which prevent him from filling a case when the employer relocates him.

The case of Zullo vs Superior Court suggested that Ms Zullo, who worked as an accountant, was caught off-guard, and the agreement wasn’t clear as to the terms of her employer to arbitrate its own disputes, as this term was not included in the policy itself (maybe Zullo’s employer was too busy to include it).

In short, the recent activity in employment law has all but negated the arbitration agreement between employer and employee because they have been found to be far too difficult to uphold. In some cases they have been found to be discriminatory and abusive in such cases where an exiting employee is forced to sign away their rights to sue just to get final pay.

So in a nutshell, to avoid disputes between employer and employees, both parties should sit together and discuss the agreement terms so that they don’t face legal action taken against them, which will save both parties time and money of course. And they will be able to perform their job efficiently together.

If you you have been mistreated or paid improperly and you were forced to sign an arbitration agreement in California, you need to speak to United Employees Law Group right away. Don’t be bullied out of your rights.

Photo Credit: Shutterstock/Bacho

The post Los Angeles Employee Arbitration Agreements: LEGAL? appeared first on UELG.