Summary of May 2025’s Labor Law Cases in California
This roundup reviews labor and employment decisions decided in May 2025 by California appellate courts and administrative bodies. These developments are critical for HR, employers, and legal practitioners monitoring California labor law.
Hofer v. Boladian — California Court of Appeal (2025 WL 1354795)
Date decided: May 9, 2025
Summary: Plaintiff bypassed arbitration by participating extensively in court—filing pleadings, propounding over 700 discovery requests, opposing demurrers, paying jury fees, and requesting jury trial—then later moved to compel arbitration.
Ruling: Court affirmed that such pre-arbitration litigation conduct constitutes a waiver of arbitration rights per Quach precedent.
Implications:
California employers should promptly move to compel arbitration if arbitration clauses exist; significant court participation before doing so may surrender that right.
Sanders v. Superior Court / Edward D. Jones & Co., L.P. — California Court of Appeal, 2nd Appellate District, Div. 7 (Record No. 0290‑24‑2)
Date decided: May 13, 2025
Summary: Plaintiff filed for wage‑hour and PAGA claims. Employer secured arbitration, but failed to pay $54,000 arbitration fees within 30 days under CCP § 1281.98. Plaintiff moved to vacate arbitration order and proceed in court.
Ruling: The Court held CCP § 1281.98 is not preempted by the FAA and that the drafting party’s failure to timely pay allows the employee to withdraw. It granted writ, vacated arbitration order, and remanded for fee-shifting consideration.
Implications:
Section 1281.98 empowers employees to opt out of arbitration if employers delay payment—emphasizing administrative compliance for arbitration agreements.
Conclusion: Looking back on California Labor Cases in May 2025
Our top takeaways from May 2025’s cases in California are that:
- Arbitration demands must be timely or risk being waived through litigation (Hofer).
- CCP 1281.98 is enforceable, enabling employees to rescind arbitration where employer fee payment is tardy (Sanders, May 6, 2025).
- California employers should react swiftly to arbitration clause violations, and strictly comply with arbitration fee timelines. Staying ahead of these rulings helps maintain enforceability and avoid liabilities.
If you’d like assistance updating your policies or need help with arbitration or wage-and-hour compliance under California law, contact HKM today. We’re here to guide you.
