​On July 23, Lauren Teukolsky chaired the California Lawyers Association's Annual Advanced Wage and Hour Conference. The conference was covered by Law360, which interviewed Ms. Teukolsky about AB 2155, a recent California law aimed at expanding the state’s forced arbitration exemptions to mirror federal law.

As the article  explains, California has its own arbitration law, the California Arbitration Act (CAA). Before the new law went into place, the CAA lacked certain exemptions contained in the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). Specifically, the FAA excludes “transportation workers” from arbitration, as well as sexual harassment and assault claims. California law had no such exemptions. Law 360 quoted Ms. Teukolsky saying, “Generally speaking, California law is far more protective of employees than federal law. Oddly, the one place where that was not true was in our arbitration law."

Governor Newsom recently signed AB 2155 was into law to close the loophole. It provides that exemptions to the FAA apply equally to the CAA. The law goes into effect on January 1, 2027. This means if arbitration agreements are covered by the CAA, transportation workers such as delivery drivers will be exempted from arbitration. Similarly, under the CAA, no sexual harassment or assault cases may be sent to arbitration. (The California Court of Appeal already reached this conclusion, holding the CAA was preempted to the extent it would require arbitration of sexual harassment or assault cases.)

Ms. Teukolsky has represented workers for over two decades and her commentary on the latest developments in employment law is regularly featured by major publications such as Bloomberg Law, Law360, The Guardian, and the Los Angeles Times.

To read the Law 360 article, click here. If you believe you’ve been treated unlawfully in the workplace and want to get in touch with our office, click here.

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has launched its new National Enforcement Plan (NEP) for fiscal years 2025–2029, signaling a major shift in federal workplace antidiscrimination policy. Moving away from past strategies, the agency is decreasing its focus on "disparate impact" which involves unintentional discrimination caused by neutral company policies. Instead, the EEOC is directing its resources toward tackling intentional discrimination. Under this new direction, the agency will closely examine corporate Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives, specifically targeting practices like hiring quotas, diverse interview panels, and mandatory diversity statements.

The plan also emphasizes the agency should actively target businesses that favor temporary visa holders over qualified domestic applicants, viewing such practices as an ‘anti-American’ form of national origin discrimination. At the same time, the agency is adjusting its legal strategies to raise the bar for employers trying to deny religious accommodations in the workplace. Under the updated standards, companies must now prove that accommodating an employee's faith would result in substantial increased costs or structural disruptions to their business operations.

Teukolsky Law condemns the EEOC’s weakening of federal protections for employees. Fortunately, California law is far more protective of workers than federal law, and workers in our state are still protected by California’s robust anti-discrimination statutes.
​
Lauren Teukolsky has represented workers for over two decades and her commentary on the latest developments in employment law is regularly featured by major publications such as Bloomberg Law, Law360, The Guardian, and the Los Angeles Times. If you would like to speak with her about an employment matter, click here.

UNITE HERE Local 11, a labor union representing stadium hospitality workers, secured a major victory by ratifying a historic collective bargaining agreement with Legends Global, the food service provider for SoFi Stadium. On June 11, 2026, workers overwhelmingly approved the contract with a 99.6% vote, averting a high-profile strike that threatened to disrupt the stadium's opening FIFA world cup matches in Inglewood, California. The union leveraged the intense pressure of the upcoming global soccer event after its membership voted to authorize a walkout just a week prior.

The newly approved contract delivers substantial economic and systemic protections for the stadium's estimated 2,000 hospitality workers. Financially, the agreement guarantees significant wage increases over the next two years, while tipped employees like bartenders and servers will receive a 30 percent pay raise. Beyond standard compensation, the contract addresses critical civil liberties concerns. Crucially, the union secured robust privacy protections regarding workers' immigration status, a direct response to the planned deployment of federal Department of Homeland Security personnel at World Cup venues. The contract also guarantees workers the right to walk off the job if federal immigration enforcement actions threaten their safety.

Lauren Teukolsky has represented workers for over two decades, partnering with UNITE HERE Local 11 on several employment-law cases. Her commentary on the latest developments in employment law is regularly featured by major publications such as Bloomberg Law, Law360, Law.com, and the Los Angeles Times. If you would like to speak with her about a labor matter, click here.

Governor Gavin Newsom recently signed Executive Order N-6-26, establishing a structured state framework to analyze and prepare for the economic effects of artificial intelligence (AI) automation on workers and businesses. California houses 33 of the world’s top private AI companies, making it a central hub for the technology's development. As AI tools increasingly integrate into everyday business operations, state policymakers are focusing on how this shift impacts the broader labor market.

The executive order does not create immediate mandates for private employers, but it directs state agencies to study the technology and recommend future policy changes. Under the order's timeline, the state plans to launch a public dashboard by August 2026 to track AI-related job shifts using unemployment data. By November 2026, the Labor and Workforce Development Agency is tasked with proposing updates to California's mass layoff laws, specifically the WARN Act, to account for workforce reductions triggered by technological displacement.

State agencies are also instructed to research various economic models and retraining strategies to manage this transition. This includes exploring options for mandatory severance standards, and developing an "AI Playbook" to help the Employment Development Department modernize its job-training programs. The order also calls for a review of how unionized workplaces handle AI integration through collective bargaining agreements.
​
Lauren Teukolsky has represented workers for over two decades and her commentary on the latest developments in employment law is regularly featured by major publications such as Bloomberg Law, Law360, The Guardian, and the Los Angeles Times. If you would like to speak with her about an employment matter, click here.

On June 9, 2026, the Faster Labor Contracts Act passed the U.S. House of Representatives in a bipartisan vote. The bill secured majority support from 210 democrats and 20 republicans. It now heads to the U.S. Senate, where it already enjoys notable bipartisan backing, including a companion bill sponsored by Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO).

The bill is designed to prevent employers from dragging out or stalling negotiations when workers form a new union. Existing law requires employers to negotiate with unions in “good faith”, but it lacks an official deadline for a deal to be reached. Supporters of the bill pointed to data showing that unions and employers takes around 400 days on average to reach their first collective bargaining agreement. To eliminate these prolonged delays, the bill establishes a strict, mandatory timeline that forces both sides into mediation and arbitration if talks stall.

Under the bill, employers must begin negotiating within 10 days of receiving a written request from a new union. If a deal isn’t agreed upon within 90 days of starting talks, either side may request mediation through the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS) for a 30-day mediation window. If mediation fails after the 30-day period, the FMCS would refer the dispute to a three-person arbitration panel. The panel is comprised of one representative chosen by the workers, one representative chosen by the employer, and one neutral third party. These three members will write the collective bargaining agreement terms, which would impose a legally binding two-year deal.
​
Lauren Teukolsky has represented workers for over two decades and her commentary on the latest developments in employment law is regularly featured by major publications such as Bloomberg Law, Law360, The Guardian, and the Los Angeles Times. If you would like to speak with her about an employment matter, click here.

Lauren Teukolsky was quoted in a May 18 article by the San Francisco Chronicle on the growing trend of California lawyers using artificial intelligence (AI) in litigation. Law firms are adopting AI technology to draft briefs, review filings, and generate citations saving time and money. AI is not perfect and tends to hallucinate legal cases or their content; a recent global survey found 957 cases where U.S. courts discovered that AI had produced hallucinated content, primarily in civil cases.

A simple fix to the AI hallucination problem is to have lawyers verify AI-generated content. The San Francisco Chronicle described Ms. Teukolsky’s use of the AI tool Deep Research to find citations she needed for an employment case and verify the findings in 10-15 minutes. Ms. Teukolsky explained that the results were “as good as a very competent attorney would produce,” but “an attorney would take at least a week” to complete this task.

One potential consequence of this growing AI use is the replacement of legal support staff that aid attorneys in litigation. AI can replicate tasks traditionally performed by law clerks, legal assistants, and paralegals at a fraction of the cost. Ms. Teukolsky surmised, “It will cost jobs, paralegals, clerks.”

​Ms. Teukolsky has represented workers for over two decades and her commentary on the latest developments in employment law is regularly featured by major publications such as Bloomberg Law, Law360, The Guardian, and the Los Angeles Times.

To read the article in its entirety, click here. If you believe you’ve been treated unlawfully in the workplace and want to get in touch with our office, click here.

Lauren Teukolsky was quoted in April 22 article by The Guardian, which discusses Amazon’s treatment of injured workers. Workers were allegedly encouraged to continue their shifts shortly after witnessing traumatic events or medical emergencies on the floor. According to the article, workers say Amazon artificially lowers its injury numbers by using its in-house medical clinics, known as AmCare, to filter out injury reports. The article quotes workers as saying these clinics provide minimal care and are used to help Amazon avoid officially recording an injury.

The article describes a recent lawsuit that Teukolsky Law filed against Amazon. In the complaint, plaintiff Juan Loera-Gomez alleges he suffered injuries to his back and shoulders after spending hours lifting boxes that each weighed more than 50 pounds. Amazon allegedly accommodated his injuries by moving him to a light duty position for six months, but abruptly placed him on unpaid leave, saying the company could no longer accommodate his work restrictions. He was then fired. The lawsuit alleges claims for disability discrimination and failure to provide a reasonable accommodation.

The Guardian quoted Ms. Teukolsky saying, “This isn’t an isolated incident. It looks to me there’s a pretty clear pattern of this occurring in Amazon warehouses”

Ms. Teukolsky has represented workers for over two decades and her commentary on the latest developments in employment law is regularly featured by major publications such as Bloomberg Law, Law360, Daily Journal, and the Los Angeles Times.
​
To read the article in its entirety, click here. If you believe you’ve been treated unlawfully in the workplace and want to get in touch with our office, click here.

The Department of Labor (DOL) recently proposed several new changes to wage and hour laws. The DOL published a proposed rule to restructure wage calculations for H1-B immigrant workers last month, raising their minimum wage and making it more costly for employers to sponsor entry-level workers.

In February, the DOL proposed a rule to rescind the 2024 Biden-era guidance on the classification of independent contractors. The rules return to the 2021-Trump-era rule, the “economic dependence” test, and  lower the bar for workers to be classified as independent contractors. The test examines the opportunity for workers to earn profits or incur losses based on their initiative and the degree of control a worker exercises over their work.

The DOL has also proposed rules that make it more difficult for employees to prove joint employer liability. The new rule narrowly defines a joint employer as any business which has “substantial direct and immediate control” over another employer’s workers. Employers that meet the joint employer criteria are potentially liable for unfair labor practices committed by the other companies and they have a duty to negotiate with a union representing the jointly employed workers. Under this narrow definition, workers will have a harder time proving that another company is jointly liable for federal bargaining obligations or for unfair labor practices.
​
Lauren Teukolsky has represented workers for over two decades and her commentary on the latest developments in employment law is regularly featured by major publications such as Bloomberg Law, Law360, Law.com, and the Los Angeles Times. If you have a wage-and-hour issue and would like to speak with her, click here.

The Inland Empire’s local NPR affiliate, KVCR News, covered a recent lawsuit filed by Teukolsky Law against Amazon on behalf of Juan Loera, a former San Bernardino warehouse employee who sustained life-altering injuries after two years of handling heavy cargo. The lawsuit contends Mr. Loera’s condition required medical accommodation, but he was allegedly forced into unpaid leave and eventually terminated via email, causing significant financial hardship for his family.

Data from the Strategic Organizing Center and the National Employment Law Project shows that the serious injury rate at Amazon facilities was nearly double that of its industry competitors in 2024. The company accounted for 56% of all serious industry injuries, often requiring workers to be moved to light duty or to miss work entirely due to the severity of their physical trauma.

As the Inland Empire continues to serve as a global hub for logistics, this case serves as a bellwether for how large-scale employers manage disability accommodations and the protection of workers who exercise their right to demand safer working conditions.

Mr. Loera is represented by Lauren Teukolsky and staff attorneys at The Warehouse Worker Resources Center, a nonprofit organization dedicated to improving working conditions in the warehouse industry in Southern California. Ms. Teukolsky has represented workers for over two decades, including in unpaid wage cases. Her commentary on the latest developments in employment law is regularly featured by major publications such as Bloomberg Law, Law360, Law.com, and the Los Angeles Times.
​
To read the KVCR article, click here. If you believe you’ve been treated unlawfully in the workplace and want to get in touch with our office, click here.

A Law360 article covers a recent lawsuit filed by Teukolsky Law against food service giant Compass Group USA regarding unpaid travel time at Los Angeles International Airport (LAX). The article highlights the significant amounts of unpaid time airport lounge workers must spend on employer-mandated shuttle buses to travel to their work stations after they pass through TSA security checkpoints.

Plaintiff Ignacio Vazquez and his coworkers work in the remote Terminal R , which is not connected to LAX and can only be accessed by taking a shuttle. The complaint alleges that employees must wait alongside passengers for the shuttle to arrive, take the shuttle across the tarmac (where they are often stopped by passing airplanes), and are allowed to clock in only after they reach their workstations in Terminal R.

A previous employer permitted employees to clock in before they boarded the employer-mandated shuttle bus and be paid for the travel time, but Compass changed this practice, resulting in significant amounts of unpaid time. The lawsuit alleges Compass disciplined employees who attempted to clock in before they boarded the shuttle so they could be paid for the time. As discussed in the Law360 article, employees can lose up to an hour of pay each day navigating the mandatory travel requirements.

Mr. Vazquez and putative class members are represented by Lauren Teukolsky and staff attorneys from UNITE HERE Local 11. Ms. Teukolsky has represented workers for over two decades, including in unpaid wage cases. Her commentary on the latest developments in employment law is regularly featured by major publications such as Bloomberg Law, Law360, Law.com, and the Los Angeles Times.

To read the Law 360 article, click here. If you believe you’ve been treated unlawfully in the workplace and want to get in touch with our office, click here.