CDF Labor Law

California employers that use artificial intelligence or other automated tools to manage their workforce could soon face a significant new set of obligations that will be layered on top of the existing regulations.

The flood of California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA) lawsuits targeting cookies, pixels and other tracking tools under antiquated laws that did not contemplate the internet is on its way to an end. For years, plaintiffs’ lawyers and individuals have used CIPA to send demand letters, commence arbitrations and class action lawsuits against companies of every size alleging that website tracking was illegal eavesdropping.

As businesses implant AI tools deeper into hiring, the litigation keeps coming – and the courts are expected to fill in the gaps left by the absence of settled precedent. The latest guidance arrives from the Northern District of California, where a magistrate judge has issued a discovery ruling in the closely watched Mobley v. Workday, Inc. litigation that tells employers a great deal about how these cases will be fought.

Yesterday, the Department of Homeland Security published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking implementing a $103,265 fee for cap subject H-1B petitions for federal fiscal year 2028. This is the Trump Administration’s second attempt to levy a six-figure fee on H-1B visas. On June 8, 2026, the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts struck down the Trump Admiration’s previous $100,000 H-1B visa fee, holding that it was a tax not authorized by Congress.

The National Labor Relations Board’s (NLRB”) General Counsel, Crystal Carey, has provided the Agency and employers with a clearer roadmap of where federal labor policy may be headed. On August 26, 2026, Carey issued Memorandum GC 26-04, identifying Biden-era Board precedents she has already asked the Board to overturn and several more she intends to challenge when the right case presents itself. This list is significant, but not surprising.

A divided 9th Circuit Court of Appeal published an important decision that opens the door to employees in arbitration getting their claims into Court under the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021 (“EFAA”). This case also illustrates the importance of compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure 1281.98 (“1281.98”) and paying arbitration fees timely.

Remote work is common. Many California based companies have employees in other states. But does the California Labor Code cover those employees as though they were living and working in the state? On July 30, 2026, the California Court of Appeal concluded that California employment laws, which may have essentially prohibited the Company from terminating the employee, did not cover a Utah-based worker. Saberin v.

The National Labor Relations Board took a significant step toward a potential new era of labor law earlier this week. On Monday, August 17, 2026, James R. Macy was sworn in as a Member of the Board. President Donald Trump nominated Macy in April for a term extending through August 27, 2030.

Late last week, California has announced that the new minimum wage for 2027 will be $17.40 per hour. This represents an increase of fifty cents per hour or approximately 3 percent (from $16.90 currently).

Any manager who reviewed accommodation requests claiming a need for a religious accommodation in light of a vaccine mandate has seen this genre of request. An employee objects to a workplace vaccine requirement with the words “faith”, “holistic”, “personal choice” and citations to scripture as a basis for a religious accommodation. Such requests have created a conundrum for managers and HR professionals between protecting the safety of others and determining what should be treated as religion.