Updated
Updated · Davis Wright Tremaine · Aug 13
California Appeals Court Limits State Job Laws for Utah Remote Worker in Arrest-Record Case
Updated
Updated · Davis Wright Tremaine · Aug 13

California Appeals Court Limits State Job Laws for Utah Remote Worker in Arrest-Record Case

3 articles · Updated · Davis Wright Tremaine · Aug 13

Summary

  • A California Court of Appeal ruled California employment laws did not govern a Utah-based remote worker’s firing, even though his employer was headquartered in California.
  • The court said California’s arrest-record protections can reach out-of-state workers only when the challenged conduct has a sufficient California nexus, and a California choice-of-law clause does not automatically extend those statutes.
  • Key facts cut against applying California law: the employee lived and worked in Utah, the arrest occurred in Florida, his supervisor was outside California, and the termination decision was made by managers in Illinois.
  • The decision in Saberin v. Alation gives California employers a statute-by-statute framework for remote-work disputes, signaling that headquarters location alone will not decide multistate employment-law coverage.

Insights

Could your remote job for a California company leave you stripped of the state's famous workplace protections?
If standard choice-of-law clauses fail, what hidden legal loopholes are multistate employers using to govern remote employees today?