Last week, Bloomberg Law cited research by Lauren Teukolsky in an article about oral arguments in Moriana v. Viking River Cruises, Inc., a pivotal Supreme Court case that was sent back to the California Court of Appeal for further action. The appellate court’s decision could have vast repercussions for lawsuits brought under the Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”).  

Since SCOTUS’s Viking River decision, Ms. Teukolsky’s research shows that California courts have consistently rejected employer arguments that representative PAGA claims must be dismissed once the “individual” component of the plaintiff’s PAGA claim has been sent to arbitration. Bloomberg Law’s article states:

“California trial courts dismissed representative claims after moving individual claims into arbitration in just six of 75 decisions collected and analyzed by Lauren Teukolsky of the plaintiff-side firm Teukolsky Law APC. Bloomberg Law independently reviewed those decisions.” 

Ms. Teukolsky’s updated numbers show an even greater trend in favor of employees.

Viking River and the fate of PAGA have been on the forefront of labor and employment experts’ minds for the past several years. In addition to her commentary on the issue for news outlets such as Bloomberg Law and the Daily Journal, Ms. Teukolsky has also discussed the implications of Viking River on a panel for CELA, a statewide organization that works to protect and expand the legal rights of workers, as well as for the College of Labor and Employment Lawyers, the preeminent peer-selected organization of labor and employment lawyers in the United States.

To read the article on Bloomberg Law, click here. To get in touch with Teukolsky Law, click here. 

Last month, Bloomberg Law quoted Lauren Teukolsky in an article about the differing approaches taken by California Superior Courts and federal courts towards representative Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claims in the months since the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana.

In Viking River, the majority held that employers could force arbitration of workers’ individual claims under PAGA, a California law that allows workers to sue companies for employment law violations on behalf of the state. However, the decision was written in a way that essentially left the fate of representative PAGA claims in the hands of California’s lower courts.  

For the most part, federal courts have strictly adhered to the Supreme Court’s ruling, sending individual claims to arbitration, and dismissing representative PAGA claims in over half of the decisions analyzed by Bloomberg Law. According to research conducted by Ms. Teukolsky, California’s state courts have taken a different tack. The article states:

“In sharp contrast, state trial courts dismissed representative claims after moving individual claims into arbitration in just six of 75 decisions collected and analyzed by Lauren Teukolsky of the plaintiff-side firm Teukolsky Law PC. Bloomberg Law independently reviewed those decisions […] The trend of state courts not dismissing non-individual PAGA claims is a huge victory for workers in the state of California,” Teukolsky said.  The fate of PAGA will likely be decided in Adolph v. Uber, which is currently pending before the California Supreme Court.

Ms. Teukolsky is frequently cited in news publications for her commentary on developments in employment law, including a pair of Bloomberg Law and Daily Journal articles in 2022 that featured her commentary on Viking River. Ms. Teukolsky also discussed the case on several panels organized by the Los Angeles County Bar Association, the California Employment Lawyers Association, and the College of Labor and Employment Lawyers, the preeminent peer-selected organization of labor and employment lawyers in the United States. To learn more about Ms. Teukolsky’s experience, click here.
​
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.

In December, Lauren Teukolsky was quoted in a Daily Journal article discussing the future of California’s Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) in 2023.

PAGA is a California labor law that allows workers to sue their employers for labor violations on behalf of the state. In 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana was believed by some to be a victory for employers, preventing employees from asserting PAGA claims affecting multiple employees. However, according to the article, research conducted by Ms. Teukolsky in the aftermath of Viking shows employees have fared well in California state courts:

“Superior court judges have rejected defense motions to dismiss PAGA claims for a plaintiff’s co-workers 92% of the time even as they have referred individual claims to arbitration, according to records compiled by Lauren K. Teukolsky of the plaintiff’s firm Teukolsky Law APC. Just six PAGA cases have been dismissed in state court in what she referred to as the ‘full Alito.’”

In federal courts, the picture painted by Ms. Teukolsky’s research is not as encouraging for workers. The article states:

“Employers have had a lot more success in federal court, where judges have dismissed PAGA claims six of 11 times, she added. But the vast majority of cases ­– 75, Teukolsky said ­– have been considered in state court.”

Ms. Teukolsky previously discussed the implications of Viking River on panels organized by the Los Angeles County Bar Association, the California Employment Lawyers Association, and the College of Labor and Employment Lawyers, the preeminent peer-selected organization of labor and employment lawyers in the United States.  She is also frequently cited in news publications for her commentary on developments in employment law, including a June 2022 Bloomberg Law article that featured her commentary on Viking River. To learn more about Ms. Teukolsky’s experience, click here.
​
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 will sit on a panel on Saturday, December 3rd to discuss Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, a Supreme Court case that has changed the landscape of employment law. The program was organized by the Los Angeles County Bar Association (LACBA).  Ms. Teukolsky will be joined by a trio of widely respected arbitrators and mediators, the Honorable Amy D. Hogue, Monique Ngo-Bonnici, and Deborah Crandall Saxe, along with George S. Howard Jr., a partner at Paul, Plevin, Sullivan & Connaughton LLP.
​
The panelists will discuss the impact of Viking River on Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) claims, and share tips on litigating PAGA cases in arbitration.  Ms. Teukolsky has analyzed almost 80 post-Viking  trial court orders, and will share her insights on how courts have been ruling on motions to compel arbitration since June 2022, when the U.S. Supreme Court decided Viking.  She will also discuss several Court of Appeals decisions that have been handed down since Viking, and her predictions for how the California Supreme Court will rule in the highly anticipated Adoph v. Uber appeal, which will likely answer the question of PAGA standing addressed by the U.S. Supreme Court in Part IV of Viking.

Ms. Teukolsky previously discussed the implications of Viking River on a panel for CELA, a statewide organization that works to protect and expand the legal rights of workers, as well as for the College of Labor and Employment Lawyers, the preeminent peer-selected organization of labor and employment lawyers in the United States.  She is also frequently cited in news publications for her commentary on developments in employment law, including a June Bloomberg Law article that features her commentary on Viking River. To learn more about Ms. Teukolsky’s experience, click here.

To register for the program, click here. 

An article by Lauren Teukolsky was published in the November 2022 issue of the California Labor & Employment Law Review. In the article, Ms. Teukolsky discusses the history of Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, a recently-decided U.S. Supreme Court case that has been closely monitored by worker’s advocates and corporate counsel alike. The article was co-authored with Michael Rubin, a renowned employment law attorney who represented Ms. Moriana before the U.S. Supreme Court.  The article discusses the legal strategies used at the Supreme Court, what was (and wasn’t) decided in Viking, and why California trial courts have almost uniformly refused to be bound by the majority’s state-law-based holding in Part IV of the decision.
​
Ms. Teukolsky has fought to protect employee’s rights for over 20 years and is an expert in employment law. She recently discussed Viking in a pair of panels hosted by the College of Labor and Employment Lawyers and the California Employment Lawyers Association. Her commentary on the Supreme Court case was also featured in an article by Bloomberg Law.

The California Labor & Employment Law Review is an official publication of the California Lawyers Association (CLA) Labor and Employment Law Section. CLA is a nonprofit, voluntary bar association serving thousands of licensed attorneys throughout California.

To read the article in its entirety, click here. To get in touch with our office, click here.

Ms. Teukolsky will speak on a panel for a CELA Webinar on the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana on July 18, 2022, from 12 pm to 1:15 pm. At the webinar, Ms. Teukolsky will unpack the Court’s decision and discuss the decision’s impact on pending and future cases brought under California’s Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA). Ms. Teukolsky will speak alongside co-panelist Michael Rubin of Altshuler Berzon LLP, and the discussion will be moderated by Mariko Yoshihara, CELA Legislative Counsel & Policy Director. To register for the webinar, click here.

Ms. Teukolsky has fought to protect employee’s rights for over 20 years and is a frequent speaker at conferences on topics of employment law and litigation.  She is also frequently cited in news publications for her commentary on developments in the field and was most recently quoted in a June Bloomberg Law article on the Supreme Court’s decision in Viking River. To learn more about Ms. Teukolsky’s experience, click here.
​
CELA (California Employment Lawyers Association) is a statewide organization that works to protect and expand the legal rights of workers through litigation, education, and advocacy.

Earlier this month, a draft majority opinion striking down the landmark decision in Roe v. Wade was leaked to the public, causing widespread fear and leading to protests across the country. Though the draft decision has not yet been finalized, if Roe is struck down when the Supreme Court releases its final decision this summer, the effect would not only be calamitous for women’s reproductive health, but disastrous for American workers as well.

If Roe is overturned, trigger laws in effect across 13 states would ban the procedure almost immediately in those states. An analysis by the Guttmacher Institute suggests that an additional 13 states might quickly follow suit and ban abortions as well. Under these circumstances, many workers would quickly suffer the brutal consequences of a post-Roe America.

Overturning Roe would likely force many workers to travel out of state for abortion care. Workers who previously needed only a day or two of leave will likely need several additional days of leave time to travel out of state.  The federal government does not require employers to provide any paid leave time   to employees, meaning that many workers will not have any paid leave time to seek out-of-state abortion care.  Although the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) guarantees employees the right to take up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave to care for a serious health condition that makes the employee unable to perform her job, it seems unlikely that needing to get an abortion would be covered.  (Ironically, if a woman suffered serious complications from receiving an unsafe abortion, only then would she qualify for FMLA leave.)  And, employers can require employees to provide a doctor’s note certifying the employee’s need to take FMLA leave.  In states where abortion will be illegal, it is unclear how a worker would obtain this documentation. 

The lack of any federal laws guaranteeing leave time—paid or unpaid—means that many workers will have to choose between losing their jobs and being forced to carry an unwanted pregnancy.  Many of these workers will be forced to have children, frequently without concomitant increases in paid leave or paid childcare, given that the US is the only wealthy nation in the world without a national guaranteed paid parental leave program. It is expected that these circumstances will precipitate a drop in women in the workforce, erasing many of the gender pay gap gains abortion protections helped give rise to over the past several decades.

Even though the effects of a post-Roe workplace appear difficult to overcome, there will still be a role for corporations and employers to play to protect their employees. Employers in states that restrict access to reproductive health could add health benefits specifically to cover out of state abortion costs. Corporations such as Tesla, Citigroup, Yelp, Amazon, Apple, and Starbucks all have policies in place or have offered to cover some expenses for employees seeking abortions not offered in their home states. 
​
Teukolsky Law stands in solidarity with the workers that will be affected should the Court’s draft opinion become the law of the land. For a list of abortion funds and pro-choice groups to donate to, click here.