New Provision Added to the California Labor Code Protecting Employers of Emergency Service Workers
Time 2 Minute Read

In the recent election, Californians voted to add an employer-friendly provision to the Labor Code that allows emergency ambulance workers to be on-call during breaks.  California is one of 24 states that allow voters to initiate laws through the petition process.

This initiative followed a December 2016 California Supreme Court decision, Augustus v. ABM Security Services, Inc, which determined that security guards cannot be required to be “on call” during their rest periods. The decision held that employers must relieve employees of all employment-related duties during their rest periods.

The new law, known as the Emergency Ambulance Employee Safety and Preparedness Act, creates a carve-out for emergency ambulance employees when it comes to California’s rest period obligations. It provides that emergency ambulance employees “shall remain reachable by a portable communications device throughout the entirety of each work shift” and if the employee is interrupted during his or her rest break, that rest break does not count towards the breaks the worker is required to receive.

This new statute also provides that it is declaratory of existing California law, which means it will be implemented retroactively.  As of now, it is applicable to emergency ambulance employees only, and it is not yet clear whether the declaratory statute will impact analogous employers.

  • Partner

    Emily co-chairs the firm’s labor and employment group and has a national practice focusing on complex employment and wage and hour litigation and advice. Emily is an accomplished trial lawyer who defends employers in complex ...

You May Also Be Interested In

Time 3 Minute Read

Last week, the Ninth Circuit issued an opinion in Sharp v. S&S Activewear, L.L.C. where it confirmed that music in the workplace can form the basis of a Title VII sex harassment claim even when it is (1) not directed at any particular individual employee, and (2) offends both female and male employees.

Time 1 Minute Read

Please join Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP for a complimentary webinar:

Pot, Pay Scales, Paid Family Leave, Plus More: New California Employment Laws for 2023

Tuesday, January 10, 2023
3:00–4:00 pm ET
2:00–3:00 pm CT
12:00–1:00 pm PT

Time 5 Minute Read

In a huge win for California employers, the California Court of Appeals recently confirmed that courts have discretion to strike claims for penalties under the Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (“PAGA”) if the claims will be unmanageable at trial.  This decision will help employers defeat—or significantly pare down—the broad and unwieldy claims for PAGA penalties that have become popular with the plaintiffs’ bar.

Time 6 Minute Read

Employers operating in California often ask employees to agree to arbitrate employment-related disputes as a term and condition of employment.  In its recent Chamber of Commerce v. Bonta decision, the Ninth Circuit took a significant step toward prohibiting such mandatory employment arbitration agreements.  However, the combination of a 2-1 panel decision (authored by a visiting judge from the Tenth Circuit), a scathing dissenting opinion, and a holding that splits with decisions from the First and Fourth Circuits all but ensures more litigation.  As a result, the case is far from over, so while employers eventually may have to consider changing their arbitration agreement practices, they very likely have some time to let the dust settle before doing so.

Search

Subscribe Arrow

Recent Posts

Categories

Tags

Authors

Archives

Jump to Page