MICHAEL SULLIVAN & ASSOCIATES BLOG

Two weeks ago, we reported on some exciting new reforms to the Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (“PAGA”) that were beginning to take shape in the California Legislature. We are now happy to report that those changes have been formally adopted and approved!

These changes only apply to future PAGA lawsuits for which a notice was filed with the Labor and Workforce Development Agency (“LWDA”) after June 19, 2024. Pending PAGA lawsuits and ones filed based on LWDA notices that predate June 19, 2024 are not impacted. Still, the reforms provide employers with new tools to manage their PAGA exposure. Now that we have had the chance to review the text of “PAGA 2.0”, here are the biggest improvements and drawbacks we see coming down the pike.

California employers scored a victory this week, as both the CA Supreme Court and US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit confirmed that employers owe no duty of care to prevent the spread of COVID to members of their employees’ households. The facts of the case, Kuciemba v. Victory Woodworks, Inc., were actually super interesting!

As a furniture and construction company with jobsites all over California, Victory was declared an essential business during the COVID lockdowns of 2020. While the lockdown was ongoing, several employees at one of its jobsites contracted COVID. Instead of requiring its non-infected employees at that site to quarantine, Victory reassigned them to other jobsites, including Mr. Kuciemba’s, in violation of the health orders in place at the time. Not surprisingly, one of the reassigned employees gave Mr. Kuciemba COVID, and in turn, Mr. Kuciemba gave it to his wife. While she was fortunate enough to survive her bout with COVID, she was hospitalized for a considerable time, during part of which she required a respirator to breathe. The Kuciembas sued Victory, claiming (among other things) that Victory caused Mrs. Kuciemba’s injuries by negligently failing to protect its employees from the spread of COVID.

The California Supreme Court just handed down its long-awaited decision in Adolf v. Uber Technologies, Inc., (“Uber”), and you are probably wondering how that ruling affects the arbitration agreements you have in place with your employees.

The short answer is: it doesn’t. Exhale!