Is this you? As a journalist, you can create a free Muck Rack account to customize your profile, list your contact preferences, and upload a portfolio of your best work.
Claim your profile
Articles by Brett Young
Menopause In The Workplace: A Change To Existing Accommodation Laws Or A Reframing Of Existing Obligations
ArentFox Schiff are most popular: within Insurance, Real Estate and Construction and Strategy topic(s) in United States with readers working within the Healthcare and Pharmaceuticals & BioTech industries Historically, menopause has not been specifically identified as a protected medical condition under state and federal law, even though its related symptoms in many cases are medical conditions covered by existing leave and accommodation laws. That is rapidly changing.
Menopause in the Workplace: A Change to Existing Accommodation Laws or a Reframing of Existing Obligations
Historically, menopause has not been specifically identified as a protected medical condition under state and federal law, even though its related symptoms in many cases are medical conditions covered by existing leave and accommodation laws. That is rapidly changing. In 2025, Rhode Island became the first state to expressly require workplace accommodations for employees experiencing menopause and related medical conditions.
Menopause in the Workplace: A Change to Existing Accommodation Laws or a Reframing of Existing Obligations
Historically, menopause has not been specifically identified as a protected medical condition under state and federal law, even though its related symptoms in many cases are medical conditions covered by existing leave and accommodation laws. That is rapidly changing. On In 2025, Rhode Island became the first state to expressly require workplace accommodations for employees experiencing menopause and related medical conditions.
Fifth District Limits Cook Decision, Bolstering Enforceability Of Employment Arbitration Agreements In California
ArentFox Schiff are most popular: within Insurance, Real Estate and Construction and Strategy topic(s) with readers working within the Banking & Credit, Healthcare and Pharmaceuticals & BioTech industries California employers can breathe a sigh of relief. On March 17, the Fifth District Court of Appeal issued a significant, published decision in Ayala-Ventura v. Superior Court that is likely to maintain enforceability of employee arbitration agreements in the state.
Fifth District Limits Cook Decision, Bolstering Enforceability of Employment Arbitration Agreements in California
On Employers have long relied on arbitration agreements as a valuable tool for resolving workplace disputes in a more efficient and cost-effective manner than possible with traditional litigation. However, the enforceability of arbitration agreements was challenged by a 2024 decision in Cook v. University of Southern California from California’s Second District Court of Appeal, leading employers to question the viability of their existing agreements.
Class Action Year in Review: Labor & Employment - March 2024 | JD Supra
The use of arbitration agreements between employers and employees is a long-standing practice that has become an integral part of employment dispute resolution across the country. Employers often use arbitration agreements because arbitration offers a streamlined, confidential, faster, and more efficient way to resolve disputes with current and former employees.
Class Action Year in Review: Labor & Employment
Off Most notably, arbitration agreements can be used to curtail class and collective actions through waivers requiring all claims to be arbitrated on an individual basis only. For many employers, avoiding or limiting the risk, burden, and expense of class and collective actions is the most valuable aspect of an arbitration agreement. Employment arbitration continued to be a hot topic throughout 2023.
Kim v. Tinder, Inc.: Ninth Circuit Finds Named Plaintiff Inadequate for Having Arbitration Agreement While Other Class Members Did Not
Off In April 2018, Kim sued Tinder in the Central District of California alleging age discrimination. Tinder moved to compel the arbitration of Kim’s claims, which the district court granted and consequently stayed the case pending the outcome of arbitration. Kim appealed the arbitration order, but later reached a settlement with Tinder while the appeal was pending.
Employers May Face An Expanded Liability Period In PAGA Suits Under The Relation Back Doctrine
United States: Employers May Face An Expanded Liability Period In PAGA Suits Under The Relation Back Doctrine 22 March 2022 Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton Your LinkedIn Connections with the authors To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com. On February 7, 2022 a California Court of Appeal issued its decision in Hutcheson v. The Superior Court of Alameda County (UBS Financial Services, Inc.).
Employers May Face an Expanded Liability Period in PAGA Suits Under the Relation Back Doctrine | JD Supra
On February 7, 2022 a California Court of Appeal issued its decision in Hutcheson v. The Superior Court of Alameda County (UBS Financial Services, Inc.). The case addresses the relation back doctrine in the context of a Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (the “PAGA”) lawsuit, and will have important consequences for PAGA cases moving forward. The original Complaint in Hutcheson was filed by an employee named Larry Van Steenhuyse. Mr. Steenhuyse worked for UBS Financial Services, Inc.
Employers May Face an Expanded Liability Period in PAGA Suits
March 17, 2022 Russian Invasion of Ukraine Sparks Expansion of Government... by: Raymond G. Lahoud Broadband Grants May Be Taxable Income by: Casey Lide Employers May Face an Expanded Liability Period in PAGA Suits Under... by: Brett D. Young No Surprises Act Challenges, Win for Providers by: Lauren P. Carboni and Alexandra B. Shalom Advisory Opinion 22-05: OIG Declines to Impose Sanctions Against... by: Nathaniel T. Arden Biden Executive Order Requires 72-Hour Notice for Cyber Incidents by: Colin R.
Employers May Face an Expanded Liability Period in PAGA Suits Under the Relation Back Doctrine
On February 7, 2022 a California Court of Appeal issued its decision in Hutcheson v. The Superior Court of Alameda County (UBS Financial Services, Inc.). The case addresses the relation back doctrine in the context of a Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (the “PAGA”) lawsuit, and will have important consequences for PAGA cases moving forward. The original Complaint in Hutcheson was filed by an employee named Larry Van Steenhuyse. Mr. Steenhuyse worked for UBS Financial Services, Inc.
Show More
loading
Actions
Is this you?
As a journalist, you can create a free Muck Rack account to customize your profile, list your contact preferences, and upload a portfolio of your best work.Get in touch with Brett
Contact Brett, search articles and posts on X, monitor coverage, and track replies from one place.
Learn more about Muck Rack