Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The paradox of state judicial officers working in county-operated organizations culminated in a 1996 case in which the Supreme Court of California upheld the constitutionality of a statute under which the superior court of Mendocino County was bound by the county board of supervisors' designation of unpaid furlough days for all county employees ...
The California Supreme Court ruling curtails the ability of public employees in the state to seek help from the courts in labor disputes. Public employees cannot use labor law to sue employers ...
For decades, California had enjoyed full funding for its schools and unique educational programs. Then in 1978, California voters approved Proposition 13 in an attempt to cut property taxes. The state's public school system and its employees would never be the same. By 1995, California plummeted from fifth in the country to 40th in school spending.
Association of California State Supervisors - (ACSS) - Represents about 6,500 state civil service managers, supervisors and confidential employees who are excluded from collective bargaining. California State University Employees Union - (CSUEU/SEIU 2579) - Represents about 15,000 rank and file employees of the California State University system.
State Sen. Bill Dodd, D-Napa, on Thursday announced Senate Bill 1166, which he said was meant to add oversight through investigations at California State University campuses, the University of ...
Ct. L.A. County, 2010, No. BC444066) for more than 1,000 current and former California employees to settle a class action lawsuit the DFEH filed challenging the company's family medical leave practices. The settlement covers Verizon's voice, data and video operations in California, which employ more than 7,000 people.
The board of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California met in closed session Tuesday to discuss the status of investigations into multiple complaints and voted to extend Hagekhalil ...
California law and the FEHA also allow for the imposition of punitive damages [9] [10] when a corporate defendant's officers, directors or managing agents engage in harassment, discrimination, or retaliation, or when such persons approve or consciously disregard prohibited conduct by lower-level employees in violation of the rights or safety of the plaintiff or others.