California Employer Defense Litigation Counsel

How to Navigate New Legislative Hurdles

As of 2026, the regulatory burden on California employers has shifted once again. To defend a case in 2026, you must understand the laws passed in 2024 and 2025.

The Pay Transparency and Equity Act (SB 642)

In 2026, “pay secrecy” is effectively dead. Employers must not only provide pay scales in job postings but must also provide current employees with their specific pay range upon request. We assist employers in responding to these requests in a way that satisfies the law without creating unnecessary evidence for a future “disparate impact” claim.

Expanded Whistleblower Protections (Labor Code § 1102.5 Revisions)

The burden of proof in whistleblower cases has shifted significantly in favor of the employee. Under current 2026 standards, once an employee shows their “protected activity” was a contributing factor to their termination, the employer must prove by clear and convincing evidence that the termination would have happened anyway. Daily Aljian specializes in building this “clear and convincing” record through meticulous performance documentation and comparative analysis of other employees.

Defeating Class Certification: The Ultimate Defense Strategy

For an employer, the most effective way to “win” a class action is to prevent the class from ever being certified. Without a certified class, the plaintiff is left with a single-plaintiff claim, which usually lacks the financial incentive for a plaintiff’s firm to pursue it through trial.

Daily Aljian utilizes a three-pronged attack to defeat certification:

• Challenging Commonality: We demonstrate that the experiences of the employees are too varied for a “common” answer to resolve the case. If one manager handled breaks differently than another, the case cannot proceed as a class.
• Highlighting Individualized Issues: We show the court that determining liability would require thousands of “mini-trials,” making the class action format unmanageable and improper.
• Attacking the Representative: We look for unique defenses applicable only to the named plaintiff, showing they are not “typical” of the group they seek to represent.

Managing the “PAGA Pivot”

With the 2026 landscape focusing heavily on PAGA, we see more plaintiffs “pivoting” from class actions to representative actions. Our defense is equally agile. We utilize the unmanageability defense (to the extent allowed by current appellate rulings) and the statute of limitations (which is a strict one-year lookback for PAGA) to drastically reduce the “aggrieved employee” pool. By shrinking the size of the representative group, we lower the “floor” of any potential settlement.

Our Litigation Process in Employer-Based Defense

We view our clients as partners in the defense. We provide a transparent, step-by-step litigation roadmap:

Phase 1: The Tactical Response

Within days of receiving a complaint, we secure all relevant electronic data. In California, “spoliation” of evidence (losing or deleting data) can lead to devastating jury instructions. We implement an immediate Litigation Hold to protect your company.

Phase 2: The “Strike” Motion

Whenever possible, we seek to dismiss the case on the pleadings. Whether it’s a Demurrer for failing to state a legal claim or a Motion to Compel Arbitration, we look for the “exit ramp” that ends the litigation before expensive discovery begins.

Phase 3: Targeted Discovery

We don’t engage in “paper wars” for no reason. We use discovery to “trap” the plaintiff into a specific set of facts. By pinning them down early in a deposition, we create the inconsistencies needed to win the case at the summary judgment stage.

Phase 4: Motion for Summary Judgment (MSJ)

The MSJ is the most powerful tool in the defense’s arsenal. We present the judge with an undisputed set of facts that proves, as a matter of law, the company did not violate the Labor Code. A successful MSJ ends the case entirely without the risk of a jury trial.

Phase 5: Trial and Post-Trial Advocacy

If a case must go to trial, you want a firm that is comfortable in the “well” of the courtroom. We use sophisticated trial technology to tell the employer’s story. We explain the “business necessity” of your decisions, humanize the management team, and hold the plaintiff to their burden of proof.

FAQs for California Employers

What is the “Safe Harbor” under the new PAGA laws?

The 2024 reform created a “safe harbor” for employers who conduct regular, documented audits of their payroll and break policies. If you can show you were proactive, your penalty exposure can be reduced by up to 85%, even if a mistake was made.

Can we still require employees to pay for their own uniforms or equipment?

In 2026, California law is stricter than ever. If a specific “look” or tool is required for the job, the employer must generally pay for it. “Reasonable” business expenses must be reimbursed within 30 days. We help you draft reimbursement policies that prevent “nickel and dime” lawsuits.

How does the 2026 “Domestic Violence Leave” expansion affect us?

California has expanded the rights of employees who are victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, or stalking to take leave for “any related purpose.” Employers must keep all requests strictly confidential and provide “reasonable accommodations” for safety. We help HR teams manage these sensitive requests without triggering a retaliation claim.

What should we do if we receive an LWDA notice?

Do not ignore it. An LWDA notice is the precursor to a PAGA lawsuit. You have a very narrow window (often 33 to 65 days) to respond or “cure” certain violations. Contact Daily Aljian the day you receive the notice to maximize your defense options.

Is “rounding” time clocks still legal in 2026?

Following the Camp v. Home Depot decision and subsequent 2025 legislation, “rounding” is effectively dead if the employer has the capability to track time to the minute. If your system tracks to the minute, you must pay to the minute. We help clients transition to “actual time” systems to avoid massive “off-the-clock” liability.

Can an employee waive their right to a PAGA claim in an arbitration agreement?

No. Under the Adolph v. Uber ruling, while you can compel the “individual” portion of a PAGA claim to arbitration, the employee can still pursue the “representative” portion in court. However, we use a strategy of “staying” the court case until the arbitration is finished, which often results in the court case being dismissed if the employee loses in arbitration.

Protecting Your Business with Daily Aljian: Contact Us Now

The California Labor Code was not written to be fair to employers; it was written to be enforced. To survive and thrive in this environment, businesses need a defense firm that understands the technicalities of the law and the tactical realities of the courtroom.

At Daily Aljian, we defend your bottom line, your reputation, and your right to manage your business. Whether you are a Newport Beach mid-market company or a multinational corporation with a California footprint, we provide the sophisticated, dual-perspective defense you need.