Charles O. Thompson

Charles Thompson focuses his practice on employment litigation and counseling representing clients through all phases of Class Actions and Single Plaintiff cases. Charles has wide-ranging experience litigating employment-related issues for public and private companies, having handled over 1,000 employment matters for clients ranging from Fortune 500 companies to Silicon Valley startups. He has tried employment, commercial, and professional liability cases to verdict and directed verdict, and has litigated and appealed cases from California State Courts to the United States Supreme Court.

Charles represents employers in wage and hour cases, as well as EEOC class actions, in state and federal courts across the United States and has broad experience appearing before the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing, the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, the Employment Development Department, and the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Department of Labor.

In addition to his trial and counseling work, Charles serves as a private and judicial mediator and arbitrator, and has acted as a pro-tem judge upon request of the court. He has broad experience in binding arbitrations and trial. He has taught trial advocacy, diversity, employment and substance abuse to clients and industry organizations.

Throughout his career, Charles has been a champion for diversity and currently serves on the Executive Committee of the board of Directors for the Justice & Diversity Center of The Bar Association of San Francisco. He actively supports and promotes diversity efforts and collaborates with clients on diversity issues.

Subscribe to all posts by Charles O. Thompson

California Wine Country Pours Out Another Round of Paid Sick Leave Benefits

On August 18, 2020, Sonoma County joined the ranks of ten other California cities and counties that have enacted local supplemental paid sick leave ordinances related to COVID-19.1 The Board of Supervisors voted to approve the Ordinance2 as an urgency ordinance, meaning it became effective immediately and shall sunset on December 31, 2020. It will … Continue Reading

California Wildfires Increase Employer Concerns

As employers continue to address the COVID-19 pandemic, they now face a new set of workforce challenges related to extreme weather and wildfires. Both are creating a challenging remote work environment due to: (1) recent evacuations; and (2) heat exposure risks linked to employees now forced to work in their homes with closed windows (and … Continue Reading

Collision: Collateral Effects of California’s Lawsuits Against Lyft and Uber

The California Labor Commissioner’s Office has challenged Uber and Lyft in two new state-backed lawsuits that allege that the companies have engaged in “wage theft” by misclassifying their drivers as independent contractors. Filed in Alameda County, the suits are the most recent effort to enforce A.B. 5, which arguably caused a sea change in the analysis … Continue Reading

Was Mary Poppins an Employee Under California’s ABC Test?

With remote work for adults and online distance learning for students here to stay, it is natural for parents with already demanding workloads to seek the help of others to keep their children busy and focused on learning during an already difficult situation. Many parents are searching for options, including engaging the services of at-home … Continue Reading

Don’t Forget to Check, and Re-Check, the California Reopening Guidelines

Just one week after its release on July 24, California has already issued an updated version of its COVID-19 Employer Playbook for a Safe Reopening, which is intended to offer employers clear and practical guidance on how to safely reopen their businesses during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. In the latest update, employers are … Continue Reading

High Court Articulates Test for Applicability of California Wage Statement Requirements to Interstate Workers

California employers have frequently been faced with confusing standards for the application of California’s stringent wage statement requirements for employees that routinely travel between states as a function of their jobs. The California Supreme Court recently addressed this issue in two companion cases: Ward v. United Airlines, Inc. and Oman v. Delta Air Lines, Inc., … Continue Reading

Employers Score Another Hit Against AB 51 as Preliminary Injunction Extends Prohibition on Enforcement by State of California

In the span of five weeks, a coalition of plaintiffs representing national and state business organizations and employers, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the California Chamber of Commerce, have gone two for two in challenging AB 51 to restore the previous status quo permitting the use of arbitration agreements with their employees. The … Continue Reading

AB 5 Update: The California Supreme Court Will Likely Decide if Dynamex Is Retro in 2020

On Jan. 15, 2020, the California Supreme Court granted, and then deferred further action on, the appeal of a lower appellate court’s opinion in Gonzales v. San Gabriel Transit, Inc. pending its disposition of Vazquez v. Jan-Pro Franchising Int’l, Inc., which takes up the common issue of whether the Dynamex decision applies retroactively. Last year, … Continue Reading
LexBlog