By Phyllis W. Cheng
Phyllis W. Cheng is a private mediator in Los Angeles (www.Mediate.Work), and is on the mediation panels for the California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, and U.S. District Court, Central District of California. She prepares the Labor & Employment Case Law Alert, a free electronic alert service on new cases for Section members. To subscribe online at http://www.calbar.ca.gov, log onto "My State Bar Profile" and follow the instructions under "Change My E-mail Addresses and List Subscriptions."
Gerawan Farming, Inc. v. Agricultural Labor Relations Bd., 236 Cal. App. 4th 1024 (2015), review granted, 191 Cal. Rptr. 3d 497 (2015); S227243/F068526/F068676
Petitions for review after reversal of a decision of the Agricultural Labor Relations Board and denial of petition for peremptory writ of mandate. (1) Does the statutory "Mandatory Mediation and Conciliation" process (Labor Code §§ 1164-1164.13) violate the equal protection clauses of the state and federal Constitutions? (2) Do the "Mandatory Mediation and Conciliation" statutes effect an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power? (3) May an employer oppose a certified union's request for referral to the "Mandatory Mediation and Conciliation" process by asserting that the union has "abandoned" the bargaining unit? Submitted/opinion due.
Tri-Fanucchi Farms v. Agricultural Labor Relations Bd., 236 Cal. App. 4th 1079 (2015), review granted, 191 Cal. Rptr. 3d 497 (2015); S227270/F069419
Petition for review after affirmance in part and reversal in part of a decision of the Agricultural Labor Relations Board. (1) May an employer assert as a defense to a request for collective bargaining under the Agricultural Labor Relations Act (Labor Code §§ 1140-1166.3) that the certified union has "abandoned" the bargaining unit? (2) Did the Board err in granting "make whole" relief (Labor Code § 1160.3) as a remedy for the employer's refusal to bargain with the union? Submitted/opinion due.
Connor v. First Student, Inc., 239 Cal. App. 4th 526 (2015), review granted, 195 Cal. Rptr. 3d 1 (2015); S229428/B256075
Petition for review after reversal of judgment. Is the Investigative Consumer Reporting Agencies Act (Civil Code §§ 1786-1786.60) unconstitutionally vague as applied to background checks conducted on a company's employees, because persons and entities subject to both that Act and the Consumer Credit Reporting Agencies Act (Civil Code §§ 1785.1-1785.36) cannot determine which statute applies? Fully briefed.
Boling v. Public Employment Relations Bd., 10 Cal. App. 5th 853 (2017), review granted, 220 Cal. Rptr. 3d 671 (2017); S242034/D069626, D069630
Petition for review after annulment of decision of the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB). (1) When a final decision of PERB under the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act (Government Code §§ 3500 et seq.) is challenged in the court of appeal, what standard of review applies to PERB's interpretation of the applicable statutes and its findings of fact? (2) Is a public agency's duty to "meet and confer" under the Act limited to situations in which the agency's governing body proposes to take formal action affecting employee wages, hours, or other terms and conditions of employment? Answer brief due.
Wilson v. Cable News Network, Inc., 6 Cal. App. 5th 822 (2016), review granted, 214 Cal. Rptr. 3d 290 (2017); S239686/B264944
Petition for review after reversal of order granting special motion to strike. In deciding whether an employee's claims for discrimination, retaliation, wrongful termination, and defamation arise from protected activity for purposes of a special motion to strike (Civil Procedure Code § 425.16), what is the relevance of an allegation that the employer acted with a discriminatory or retaliatory motive...
