3 ms·
Not necessarily. Many such contracts also contain a choice of law clause that specifies which state's laws will apply.
by pcaharrier 5y ago
Not necessarily. Many such contracts also contain a choice of law clause that specifies which state's laws will apply.
- grumple 5y agoThe same "not necessarily" would presumably apply to the choice of law clause as well, for example if California decided they didn't want a company attempting to evade their laws with such a clause, which presumably would be at the discretion of a judge who probably isn't too fond of that behavior.
- pcaharrier 5y agoRight. See my other comment.
- gnopgnip 5y agoFor agreements entered into after January 1, 2017, California Labor Code Section 925 clarifies that employers may not require employees––who primarily work and reside in California––to agree to forum-selection and choice-of-law clauses that select non-California forums and/or laws, unless such employee is “individually represented by legal counsel in negotiating the terms of an agreement.”
- pcaharrier 5y agoCorrect. California is its own beast when it comes to employment law and franchise law and a host of related issues. Edit: and I glossed over the part about "employees living full time in California." My bad.