We have gravitated to a focused, partner-driven model that draws on outstanding attorneys, including three partners who are individually ranked in Labor & Employment - California by Chambers USA. Our team includes:
Few firms in California attract as many challenging employment defense cases. Our work includes:
- Wage and Hour Litigation
We’ve handled many class actions alleging California and federal wage-and-hour law violations, winning our clients dismissals, de-certifications and other precedent-setting verdicts, including:
- See’s Candies in using a fact-gathering campaign to demonstrate that their break policies were lawful when statistical analysis of employee timecards suggested otherwise.
- Merrill Lynch in settling a nationwide class action covering more than 21,000 financial advisors, setting the standard for such settlements throughout the industry.
- Carrington Mortgage Services in defeating class certification in a class action alleging that 11,000 employees were not properly paid for overtime work.
- 99 Cents Only Stores in defeating class certification in a wage-and-hour class action for alleged off-the-clock work arising from store security policies.
- Employee Classification
We’ve been at the forefront of employee misclassification matters even before California’s Assembly Bill 5 (AB 5) created new opportunities for independent contractors to claim they are entitled to employee benefits. Our work includes:
- Lyft in response to class actions brought in California by Lyft drivers, the California Attorney General, and several city attorneys, and in Massachusetts and the District of Columbia by Lyft drivers, alleging they were misclassified as independent contractors.
- Instacart in using strategic enforcement of the company’s arbitration agreement, and an anticipated change of venue motion, to obtain dismissal of a proposed class action based on misclassification claims.
- California Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA)
Originally enacted to help the state regulate its underground economy, PAGA allows employees to sue for almost every alleged labor code violation, creating new challenges for employers. Our deep experience with PAGA matters includes:
- 99 Cents Only Stores in resolving a PAGA action involving over 30,000 employees for just $289,000 after causing the plaintiffs to abandon most of their claims through aggressive motion practice.
- Martin Luther King, Jr., Community Hospital in a PAGA and class action suit over payment for time spent in required pre-shift COVID-19 screening.
- Multiple major retailers in so-called suitable seating cases, all of which have resolved at various stages at an extraordinary discount – some for less than a penny on the dollar.
- Harassment and Discrimination
We are frequently asked to lead confidential investigations involving allegations of workplace misconduct, counsel clients on litigation and compliance matters, recommend policy changes and help develop communication strategies with respect to these challenging issues. Our experience includes:
- Warner Bros. in an internal investigation related to reports of alleged misconduct on the set of “Bachelor in Paradise.” We helped manage media relations and threatened litigation, and helped the show return to production with new safety guidelines.
- Persuading a federal court to abstain from interfering with sexual-harassment disciplinary proceedings against the former Dean of the UC Berkeley School of Law.
- A major retailer in an investigation by the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing into sexual harassment allegations made by multiple claimants.
- A specialty retailer in an internal investigation of alleged sexual abuse of a minor employee by a high-level field manager.
- Employee Mobility
We have performed substantial work in the employee mobility space, advising companies on their rights to protect their intellectual property and executives on their rights to change jobs within confidentiality-driven industries. Our experience includes:
- Intel Corporation in obtaining a temporary restraining order against a former employee who allegedly stole trade secrets before leaving for a competitor.
- A high-level technology executive in multi-forum litigation concerning the executive’s move to a California employer from an out-of-state rival.
- Advising Amgen on the legal issues around restrictive covenants in the employment sphere and their enforceability.
We take an innovative and aggressive approach to employment litigation, helping our clients overcome broad challenges and setting industry-wide precedents:
- Precedent-Setting Application of Federal Law to a California Labor Dispute
Like other companies in the security industry, GardaWorld – one of the world’s largest – had struggled for years to balance California employment laws, which require armored car drivers to take mandatory meal and rest breaks, with a job that requires drivers to be alert and in a position to protect themselves, the public and their assigned valuables at all times.
GardaWorld, a Canadian multinational, first engaged Munger, Tolles & Olson to fight this issue in 2018. We went on to win a first-of-its-kind summary judgment ruling that held as a matter of law that GardaWorld could use “on-duty” meal periods for armored car driver-messengers.
In 2019 and 2020, Munger, Tolles & Olson went on to effectively solve the meal and rest period issues for GardaWorld, and the entire industry, by obtaining rulings that federal law preempts California’s meal and rest period laws as applied to armored car drivers. In its ruling, the court found that Department for Transportation regulations and an administrative pronouncement prevent California from enforcing rest period requirements in this context.
Through these victories, the firm changed the legal landscape for the entire armored guard industry by relieving GardaWorld and others from pending and significant class liability. On the heels of these wins, we moved north, where GardaWorld – then represented by other counsel – had suffered an adverse class action verdict and lost appeals that ran all the way to the Washington Supreme Court. Taking over the matter, our team argued that the preemption decision applicable to California would eventually apply to Washington employees. Based on this argument, the plaintiffs agreed to accept only a fraction of the judgment amount, and, in February 2020, the court granted final approval for the settlement of these actions. Since then, the firm has assisted GardaWorld in obtaining a forward-looking exemption from Washington’s state law meal period requirements.
Media Coverage: Judge Says Calif. Meal Rule Can't Protect Armored Car Drivers
- Defending a Client and Key Evidence in a Wrongful Termination Suit
Client: A major financial institution
In this high-profile case, we successfully defended a major financial institution when it terminated the employment of a senior foreign exchange executive for manipulating rates on a $12 billion deal for a U.S. fast food chain to purchase a Canadian one. The executive argued that the key evidence of their misconduct was obtained through an allegedly illegal – and therefore inadmissible – telephone recording and sought over $30 million in damages as well as exclusion of the recording in the underlying case. After a two-week trial, and a one-hour deliberation, the jury returned a unanimous verdict for the financial institution on the merits of the case and our procedural defense. The court awarded costs to our client as well. Following a subsequent ruling that the tape recording would come into evidence in the underlying employment action, we obtained the dismissal of the plaintiff’s case with prejudice.