We hear repeatedly that the disconnect is all about lags or productivity. I don’t buy it. Instead, I believe that a new force has come into play that is now altering the fundamental relationship between domestic demand and domestic employment in the United States. I call it the global labor arbitrage — the IT-enabled efficiency tactics that allow US companies to substitute high-wage domestic workers with like-quality low-wage foreign workers in goods producing and services-providing functions, alike. The lack of pricing leverage in today’s climate makes this arbitrage an increasingly urgent competitive imperative. In my view, the global labor arbitrage is likely to be an enduring feature of the macro climate — raising the distinct possibility that subpar job creation in the US could well be here to stay for the foreseeable future.
7/20/2004
Labor Market Summary
Steven Roach of Morgan Stanley has this summary of the labor market.
Students Bring Class Action Disability Discrimination Suit.
SFgate has this report.
The suit arises under California law in Alameda Superior Court.
Would-be California medical students with learning disabilities filed a discrimination suit Monday saying their prospects of becoming doctors are being thwarted because they aren't given enough time on the medical school entrance exam.
The suit arises under California law in Alameda Superior Court.
3d Cir.: LMRA Shields Attorneys From Malpractice
A lawyer hired by a union to represent one of its members in an arbitration hearing cannot later be sued by the worker for malpractice because the federal Labor Management Relations Act effectively immunizes the lawyer from such a claim, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled.The Legal Intelligencer has this report.
7/19/2004
News Roundup
The WSJ (sub. req'd) has this report: CPI up, wages flat; and this piece on legal weblogs. No mention of CL&EL (; Also, Boeing settles a sex-bias suit.
Will Wal-Mart get caught up in this settlement trend? [Not unless it really starts looking bad is my guess.]
The Sacramento Bee has this report on the status of State Fund going forward after the Schwarzenegger work/comp reform
Port business is boom, swelling the ILWU's ranks. The LA Times reports.
Will Wal-Mart get caught up in this settlement trend? [Not unless it really starts looking bad is my guess.]
The Sacramento Bee has this report on the status of State Fund going forward after the Schwarzenegger work/comp reform
Port business is boom, swelling the ILWU's ranks. The LA Times reports.
Brown University, NLRB No. 1-RC-21368
Last week, the NLRB handed down a decision reversing their decision in NYU holding that graduate students are "employees" at private universities (NLRA doesn't cover state employers.)
The central rationale seems to be that the relationship between students and the univeristy is "educational" and not "economic." (Does this problematize post-doc fellowship appointments, etc.? are professors on tenure-track "primarily economic" in their relationship vis-a-vis a university?)
The central rationale seems to be that the relationship between students and the univeristy is "educational" and not "economic." (Does this problematize post-doc fellowship appointments, etc.? are professors on tenure-track "primarily economic" in their relationship vis-a-vis a university?)
7/15/2004
State Budget Hinges--in part--on "bounty hunter" law.
The LA Times has this report:
Many GOP lawmakers say they won't support a spending plan unless the Legislature repeals what they call the "sue your boss" law, which this year expanded opportunities for workers to file lawsuits against employers.
7/13/2004
News Roundup
* Here's a novel legal theory: "Protester Tells Court: Wages Aren't Taxable." The LA Times has this report.
* Morgan Stanley settles a sexual discrimination suit minutes before trial. They agreed, in the consent decree, to outside monitors on gender bias, and increased training against discrimination. The WSJ has this report (sub req'd);
* Morgan Stanley settles a sexual discrimination suit minutes before trial. They agreed, in the consent decree, to outside monitors on gender bias, and increased training against discrimination. The WSJ has this report (sub req'd);
Agosta v. Astor, 4th. Dist. No. D04220
This ruling continues contouring the doctrine of at-will employment and its relation to contract-relationship torts. Unlike the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, which does not lie when an at-will employee is terminated, the employer cannot avoid tort liability for fraudulent inducement just because the employee's relationship with the employer is at-will.
7/12/2004
News Roundup
* The Contra Costa times reports Bay Area wages are growing more slowly.
* The LA Daily news reports has an interesting, two-sided report on UCL reform. (See this piece, via The UCL Practiioner, from the San Jose Mercury News rounding out the donations.)
[Ed: Industry seems to support turning UCL into class-action like lawsuits. There doesn't seem to be much focus on the issue of whether or not private attorneys-general are democratically accountable.]
* Not much legislative action lately because of the budget impasse.
* The aforementioned potential port strike was averted. The LA Times has this report.
* The LA Daily news reports has an interesting, two-sided report on UCL reform. (See this piece, via The UCL Practiioner, from the San Jose Mercury News rounding out the donations.)
[Ed: Industry seems to support turning UCL into class-action like lawsuits. There doesn't seem to be much focus on the issue of whether or not private attorneys-general are democratically accountable.]
* Not much legislative action lately because of the budget impasse.
* The aforementioned potential port strike was averted. The LA Times has this report.
7/09/2004
Ninth Circuit Myth Exploded
The Sacbee (via Howard Bashman) has this article:
The Ninth Circuit has been more ideologically balanced for years.
Despite a few attention-grabbing reversals - as when the Supreme Court threw out the circuit's ruling against "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, for example - about one in four 9th Circuit decisions reviewed by the high court met with its approval. Only four of the nation's 13 circuit courts did better. Six had 100 percent reversal rates.
The Ninth Circuit has been more ideologically balanced for years.
Minimum Wage
This article in Slate examines the recent minimum wage studies and suggests that earned-income tax credits are a prefereable measure.
7/07/2004
Another Port Strike Looms
LA Times reports labor contract talks between industry and labor broke down last weekend. At issue: internet software that allows customers to bypass the clerks.
The last port shutdown cost billions of dollars and has vast ripple effects.
The last port shutdown cost billions of dollars and has vast ripple effects.
Europeans Extending Workweek
A report in today's NY Times, here, reports that Europe--France and Germany at least--are extending their work-weeks, because experiments in lesser hours per week haven't reduced unemployment. The article does not explain the theory behind that macro-economic connection, and seems to suggest that competition from lower-wage countries has more to do with it.
7/06/2004
Wage Growth Study
In an otherwise slow news day in this blawg's focal area, I found this interesting study:
California cities with best wage growth (nationwide):
(4) Santa Cruz
(6) San Luis Obispo
(10) San Francisco-Oakland.
California cities with worst wage growth:
(4) Stockton
(5) Modesto
(6) San Bernardino
(8) Bakersfield
This is an interesting study, but it would be interesting to see, assuming that inflation is otherwise equal nationwide, whether these wage trends beat the real estate market.
California cities with best wage growth (nationwide):
(4) Santa Cruz
(6) San Luis Obispo
(10) San Francisco-Oakland.
California cities with worst wage growth:
(4) Stockton
(5) Modesto
(6) San Bernardino
(8) Bakersfield
This is an interesting study, but it would be interesting to see, assuming that inflation is otherwise equal nationwide, whether these wage trends beat the real estate market.
7/02/2004
New MoFo Update
MoFo has a new labor & employment law update here, by James E. Boddy.
"A Revised Roadmap For Disability Access in California"
"A Revised Roadmap For Disability Access in California"
Labor Code 96(k) Interpreted
A number of labor & employment law cases were handed down by California Courts yesterday, but I think this one is most important:
Grinzi v. San Diego Hospice Corp. 4th Dist. Case No. D04231.
Without knowing the full facts of the case, or the position the lawyers were put in, it is somewhat unfair to say this, but, isn't it in the first week of Con Law that the First Amendment only protects against government intrustion?
An employee was term'd, according to her, for participation in the "Women's Garden Circile", according to the employer for unauthorized use of their e-mail system. Here's the beef:
Many had been reading 96(k)/98.6 to limit employee reaction to any outside lawful conduct. Narrowing it to include only rights protected by the LC is dramatic in that regard.
Grinzi v. San Diego Hospice Corp. 4th Dist. Case No. D04231.
Without knowing the full facts of the case, or the position the lawyers were put in, it is somewhat unfair to say this, but, isn't it in the first week of Con Law that the First Amendment only protects against government intrustion?
An employee was term'd, according to her, for participation in the "Women's Garden Circile", according to the employer for unauthorized use of their e-mail system. Here's the beef:
By so specifying rights "otherwise protected by the Labor Code" and "under the
Labor Code," the Legislature has indicated an intention to limit the proscription against
terminations for the exercise of "any rights" to the exercise of those rights "otherwise
protected by the Labor Code." Further, the initial portion of section 98.6, subdivision (a),
proscribes terminations for several kinds of conduct delineated in "this chapter,"
including conduct under section 96, subdivision (k), and "Chapter 5 of Part 3 of Division
2," or filing claims or proceedings with the Labor Commissioner. (See fn. 10, ante.) As
such, these provisions only prohibit terminations for conduct "otherwise protected by the
Labor Code." In this context, the reasonable conclusion is the Legislature also intended
the phrase, "any rights," in the final portion of section 98.6, subdivision (a), to similarly
refer to rights "otherwise protected by the Labor Code." Consequently, for Grinzi's claim
to survive under this provision, she must allege her termination occurred because she
exercised a right protected by the Labor Code. As discussed, Grinzi does not allege she
exercised such a right.
Many had been reading 96(k)/98.6 to limit employee reaction to any outside lawful conduct. Narrowing it to include only rights protected by the LC is dramatic in that regard.
IWC Shut Down
The Sacramento Bee reports that the IWC is shut down for lack of funding, and lack of support from both parties.
We'll keep this one tabbed.
In place of the commission, future decisions about the minimum wage, overtime rules and other working conditions will be left up to the Legislature. Some workers may also pursue lawsuits to enact changes.
We'll keep this one tabbed.
Employment Figures Disappoint.
The labor statistics for the month of June were announced this morning, and they were vastly lower than expected by forecasters. The NYT has this report, and the WSJ this (sub. req'd.)
The forecast of the unemployment rate holding steady were correct. Wage growth slowed as well. This figure represents a number lower than the oft cited 150,000 per month required to meet population growth. It is worth pointing out that recent polling shows worker less secure than economists in the ability of the market to create jobs. Score one for groupthink this month.
Job Watch (part of the Economic Policy Institute--a labor-side think tank) has some interesting stats on underemployment. The Heritage Foundation (a conservative think tank) paints a rosier picture:
The forecast of the unemployment rate holding steady were correct. Wage growth slowed as well. This figure represents a number lower than the oft cited 150,000 per month required to meet population growth. It is worth pointing out that recent polling shows worker less secure than economists in the ability of the market to create jobs. Score one for groupthink this month.
Job Watch (part of the Economic Policy Institute--a labor-side think tank) has some interesting stats on underemployment. The Heritage Foundation (a conservative think tank) paints a rosier picture:
Some analysts will see these numbers as a disappointment; they're anything but that. The economy continues to add jobs broadly, and continued growth and positive earnings should see this trend maintained for some time.
7/01/2004
Proposition 64 Poll
According to The Recorder, via The UCL Practitioner, a poll shows voters favor Proposition 64.
Nothing on the website of the group sponsoring the proposition.
Nothing on the website of the group sponsoring the proposition.
Janik case uproar
Blawgosphere is in an uproar over the Janik v. Rudy, Exelrod & Zieff case, which apparently will require B&P 17200 counts in business litigation.
The Legal Reader has this pro-reform comment here, and the pro-17200 UCL Practicioner site has this comment.
One argument raised by Rudy, Exelrod was that before the Cortez decision, there was no authority to support a UCL claim for unpaid wages. Slip. Op. at 16-17.
Before we all get carried away, please understand the procedural posture of this case. This case reversed a demurrer on the grounds that there was in fact a duty owed to certain class members; it is not an imposition of a fine or a judgment.
So, stay tuned.
The Legal Reader has this pro-reform comment here, and the pro-17200 UCL Practicioner site has this comment.
One argument raised by Rudy, Exelrod was that before the Cortez decision, there was no authority to support a UCL claim for unpaid wages. Slip. Op. at 16-17.
Before we all get carried away, please understand the procedural posture of this case. This case reversed a demurrer on the grounds that there was in fact a duty owed to certain class members; it is not an imposition of a fine or a judgment.
So, stay tuned.
Effect of Fed hike; jobs report on its way
All the papers have news on yesterday's Fed rate hike. The WSJ (subscription req'd.) reports that the Fed did an excellent job of preparing the economy for the hike, so effects should be built-in to any decisions at this point. Economists consider the rates to be approaching a neutral, non-stimulus, non-restraint level sometime in 2005. Labor costs are aceelerating.
The NY Times reports that jobless claims rose by 1,000 last week, and reports an economic forecast of 240,000 new jobs in June (report will be out this week.) Nevertheless, the unemployment rate should remain at 5.6%. Workers' earnings should rise about 0.3%.
Factory activity cools in June, prices rise in the WSJ (subscription req'd.)
What does it mean for lawyers?
Right now, the indications are that hiring is up, but perceptions haven't quite caught up with that. People will be working harder, but may be more litigious in times like these.
--The Denver Business Journal, 3/15/02, citing EEOC data.
The NY Times reports that jobless claims rose by 1,000 last week, and reports an economic forecast of 240,000 new jobs in June (report will be out this week.) Nevertheless, the unemployment rate should remain at 5.6%. Workers' earnings should rise about 0.3%.
Factory activity cools in June, prices rise in the WSJ (subscription req'd.)
What does it mean for lawyers?
Right now, the indications are that hiring is up, but perceptions haven't quite caught up with that. People will be working harder, but may be more litigious in times like these.
In tightening economies, employers have historically faced increased exposure for employment litigation and administrative investigations. Layoffs, reductions, and restructuring frequently trigger legal action. Our current economy is no exception.
--The Denver Business Journal, 3/15/02, citing EEOC data.
Mission Statement
This legal weblog (b-law-g) is dedicated to issues of labor and employment law in California. A finer definition than that would render this discription over- and under-inclusive.
I plan to include more than case law summaries and analysis. Law and lawsuits don't exist in a bubble. There are political and economic forces at work that shape them. To the extent I believe there is a causal nexus, those things will be covered as well. This will include at a minimum, tracking and discussions of pending bills in the legislature (and, sometimes, in Congress), and discussions of economic indicators that are relevant.
I am going to do my best to give objective, neutral commentary on these issues. This means I won't be championing issues on the side of the plaintiff's bar or the industry side. That's not the point. There are thousands of blogs that amount to an un-edited, narrowly read op-ed page.
This is also not a blawg of record. Not every issue will be documented, largely because they are already so well documented. Just to give an example, the Wal-Mart case is causing a big buzz in the employment law world right now, but there's nothing really that earth shattering from a practitioner's point of view.
I am leaving comments open for now, and I invite them--from any side of the issue. Letting others voice their comments on the issue will provide interesting insight to the reactions of all sides, but, again, I won't be championing any side here.
Update: This site has received the ok from the firm, so I will no long be anonymous. My name is Jon Storm. I practice labor and employment law in San Luis Obispo, CA.
I plan to include more than case law summaries and analysis. Law and lawsuits don't exist in a bubble. There are political and economic forces at work that shape them. To the extent I believe there is a causal nexus, those things will be covered as well. This will include at a minimum, tracking and discussions of pending bills in the legislature (and, sometimes, in Congress), and discussions of economic indicators that are relevant.
I am going to do my best to give objective, neutral commentary on these issues. This means I won't be championing issues on the side of the plaintiff's bar or the industry side. That's not the point. There are thousands of blogs that amount to an un-edited, narrowly read op-ed page.
This is also not a blawg of record. Not every issue will be documented, largely because they are already so well documented. Just to give an example, the Wal-Mart case is causing a big buzz in the employment law world right now, but there's nothing really that earth shattering from a practitioner's point of view.
I am leaving comments open for now, and I invite them--from any side of the issue. Letting others voice their comments on the issue will provide interesting insight to the reactions of all sides, but, again, I won't be championing any side here.
Update: This site has received the ok from the firm, so I will no long be anonymous. My name is Jon Storm. I practice labor and employment law in San Luis Obispo, CA.
