Scherer Smith & Kenny LLP serves mid-sized and fast-growing entrepreneurial companies. From complex litigation to business, real estate, intellectual property and employment law, our team brings strategic thinking, pragmatism and intense dedication to our clients’ success.
Partner Notes
There is a lot of discussion about remote and hybrid work these days, with, understandably, a lot of good faith guessing by both employers and employees trying to figure out how to make it work effectively and in a way that is fair to both the goals of the employer and the employees.
Based on recent articles and anecdotal evidence, employees often assume that their job consists of a single purpose, being productive, and as long as they are productive, then they are doing their job and should be left alone. To many employees, this justifies working 100% remote and it’s frustrating to them when their employers still want them to show up in person either part-time or full-time at the office.
From the employer’s perspective, however, this view of what it means to work for a company, whether it’s 2 employees or 20,000 employees, is often seen as too narrow and leaves out important components of what makes a business successful.
After representing hundreds of companies over the past 20+ years we have seen successful businesses and failed businesses. Looking back at the successful ones, it’s clear that they did not only rely on productive employees to succeed. It takes a strong, success minded culture, dedicated employees, cross-communication, collaboration and innovation among other things (such as good timing).
Employers are trying to figure out how to ensure that employees are productive, but they also are trying to determine how best to engage with employees, how to mentor younger employees, how to maintain a corporate culture and how to still be innovative and grow as a business. All of these things are often much better achieved with at least some in-person time, especially mentoring younger employees who often learn a lot by observing older employees in their interactions within the organization and with customers and vendors, which is hard to achieve solely over a Zoom call.
We at SS&K have pursued a hybrid model where everyone spends sometime in the office together and some-time working remotely. So far this is working well. Employees are productive at home and being in the office allows for more informal conversations to occur, and for people who normally do not work directly with each other to socialize, share ideas and to further enhance the culture of the firm.
We wish you success in this great experiment and hope that you are successful in finding the right model for your business.
- Written by Brandon D. Smith
Annual Disclosure Summary for Common Interest Developments
We are well into the second half of 2022. With 2023 just around the corner, we write this as a friendly reminder of the annual disclosure requirements under the Davis-Stirling Common Interest Development Act (the “Act”).
As you may know, the Act requires common interest developments (“CIDs”) to prepare and distribute certain disclosures annually. If you live within a planned unit development, condominium complexes, stock cooperatives, and community apartment projects, then you live in a CID and these disclosures apply to you.
Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana – A Win for California Employers, but for How Long?
In 2004, California enacted the Private Attorney General Act (“PAGA”), a law that allows private individuals to bring enforcement actions on behalf of California’s Labor Workforce Development Agency (“LWDA”). Since its enactment, the law has been used to curb violations of the California Labor Code while simultaneously serving as a boon to many plaintiff-side employment lawyers. Under PAGA, an “aggrieved employee” can bring an action against their employer “on behalf of himself or herself and other current of former employees.” If successful, the bulk of any damages award – seventy-five percent – goes to the LWDA, while the remaining twenty-five percent is distributed among the affected employees. PAGA also provides a mandatory award of “reasonable attorney’s fees and costs,” thus incentivizing attorneys to pursue PAGA actions (even if the overall award to individual affected employees may be minimal).
