What are the opening hours?

Monday 9am - 5pm Tuesday 9am - 5pm Wednesday 9am - 5pm Thursday 9am - 5pm Friday 9am - 5pm

California Applicants' Attorneys Association

Home
United States
Sacramento, CA
California Applicants' Attorneys Association

Since 1966, the California Applicants’ Attorneys Association has dedicated itself to helping Californians that get hurt on the job heal and get back to work.

When you get hurt on the job, you need medical care and a way to pay bills until you can heal and get back to work. So state government created Workers’ Compensation in order for you to “apply” for benefits that you’re already entitled to and that your employer already paid for. But the slow-moving, inefficient, and complex state bureaucracy cheats employers out of what they paid for, rewards shady insurers, and empowers anonymous out-of-state physicians to reject your company-doctor’s orders. The system is failing Californians. Women are subjected to gender bias. Latinos are killed and injured more than others. Asians are blocked by language barriers. And African Americans are denied because of genetics.

09/21/2026

California Lawmakers Propose Ban on Employers' Emotional Surveillance of Workers

The California Legislature has passed legislation that would prevent employers from using artificial intelligence to monitor what their workers may be thinking or feeling. AB 1883, authored by ASM. Isaac Bryan, would prohibit employers from using workplace surveillance tools to recognize, infer or predict an employee’s emotional state. It would also prohibit employers from collecting neural data generated by measuring activity in a worker’s brain or nervous system.

The bill responds to the rapid growth of AI-powered workplace monitoring. Employers increasingly have access to AI emotional-analysis programs, AI interview platforms, wearable devices and other tools marketed as ways to measure productivity, engagement or stress. AB 1883 would prevent employers from using these technologies to evaluate workers’ emotions or collect neural data, even when the employer claims the information is being gathered for a wellness program or another well-intentioned purpose.

If signed by the Governor, the legislation would not ban workplace surveillance altogether. Employers will still be able to use monitoring technology like video and audio surveillance, continuous time tracking, geolocation, and similar technologies for safety and operational purposes as long as the technology does not perform emotion recognition or collect neural data. The Labor Commissioner and public prosecutors would be authorized to enforce the law with civil penalties of up to $500 per violation. Those penalties could add up quickly if the prohibited technology is used repeatedly or across a large workforce.

Workers should not be required to surrender access to their emotions, thoughts or nervous-system activity to perform a job and receive a paycheck. Technology that claims to measure a worker’s attitude, stress or emotional state can be inaccurate, invasive and easily used to influence hiring, discipline or termination decisions. AB 1883 establishes a necessary boundary on employee surveillance that keeps employers from accessing employees’ private thoughts or feelings. The bill now awaits action by Gov. Newsom.

09/17/2026

Register today for CAAA's Live Webinar
SIBTF: We Heard Your Questions, We Have Answers

Friday, October 2, 2026
12:00 - 1:00 pm
Presented by:

Scott Ford, Esq.
Ford & Wallach

Jason Marcus, Esq.
Marcus & Pulley

Bob Sherwin, Esq.
Lewis, Marenstein, Wicke, Sherwin & Lee, LLP

Jason Wells, Esq.
Wells Law

Approved Credit: 1 MCLE | 1 LS
This program has been approved for Minimum Continuing Legal Education credit by the State Bar of California in the amount of 1.0 hours.

Follow this link to register: https://bit.ly/4r2ELyw

09/14/2026

College sports have changed dramatically over the last five years. Universities now pay student athletes directly, with UCLA and UC Berkeley each reporting roughly $20.5 million in payments during the 2025-26 academic year, according to a new CalMatters article. UCLA paid 229 athletes, while UC Berkeley paid 147. Other California universities are doing the same, with San Diego State reporting at least $8.6 million in payments to athletes. Yet even as colleges compensate athletes for the value they bring to their athletic programs, they continue to insist on one important distinction: these athletes are not employees.

That distinction is becoming increasingly difficult to defend. Universities characterize the new payments as compensation for the use of an athlete’s name, image and likeness (NIL) rather than payment for playing a sport. Their contracts often expressly prohibit “pay-for-play.” But those agreements condition continued payment on continued participation in the sport. An athlete may not technically be paid to play, but if the athlete stops playing, the payments can stop.

The contracts themselves show how important the employment question has become. Agreements used by California universities expressly state that athletes are not employees. UC San Diego describes its athletes as independent contractors, while San Jose State specifically states that athletes are not entitled to workers’ compensation. UCLA goes even further, requiring athletes to agree that they are not employees and restricting their ability to sue the university for employment rights. These provisions have significant consequences for athletes performing physically demanding activities that can result in serious and career-altering injuries.

Compensating college athletes for the value they provide is fair and long overdue. What is not fair is compensating them for their athletic performance while denying them the basic rights and protections that typically accompany employment, including workers’ compensation when they are injured. Universities recruit these athletes, compensate them, control their practices and competitions, and benefit from their performance. If college athletes are going to be treated like employees when it benefits their universities, they should receive the protections of employees when they get hurt.

09/11/2026

Thank you to everyone who joined CAAA this week for an event with Democratic gubernatorial nominee Xavier Becerra. CAAA leadership and labor leaders had the opportunity to meet with Secretary Becerra and discuss issues affecting California’s workers and the workers’ compensation system. Becerra also addressed attendees before taking questions from the crowd.

Special thanks to Lester, Simone and Josh Friedman for graciously hosting, and to everyone who helped make the event a success. We appreciate our members who joined us to make their voices heard on behalf of California’s injured workers.

09/09/2026

Register today for CAAA's Live Webinar:
SIBTF: We Heard Your Questions, We Have Answers

Friday, October 2, 2026
12:00 - 1:00 pm

Presented by:

Scott Ford, Esq.
Ford & Wallach

Jason Marcus, Esq.
Marcus & Pulley

Bob Sherwin, Esq.
Lewis, Marenstein, Wicke, Sherwin & Lee, LLP

Jason Wells, Esq.
Wells Law

Approved Credit: 1 MCLE | 1 LS
This program has been approved for Minimum Continuing Legal Education credit by the State Bar of California in the amount of 1.0 hours.

Follow this link to register: https://bit.ly/4r2ELyw

09/08/2026

The California Department of Industrial Relations is facing serious questions over its use of money dedicated to the workers’ compensation system to pay for internal employee investigations, consultants and other expenses with little connection to workers’ compensation. After a Sac Bee Investigation of DIR contracts from 2020 through 2026 found more than $30 million paid from the Workers’ Compensation Administration Revolving Fund (WCARF) for such purposes. Labor Code Section 62.5 limits use of the fund to administering workers’ compensation, a return-to-work program for injured workers and enforcement against uninsured employers, and specifically states that the money “may not be used or borrowed for any other purpose.”

Among the most troubling examples is the investigation of former Cal/OSHA district manager Michael Loupe. DIR reportedly spent an estimated $80,000 from the workers’ compensation fund investigating seven allegations against Loupe, including the bizarre accusation that he fired a toy bow and arrow at photographs of Gov. Gavin Newsom and other state officials. After an 18-month investigation, Loupe was cleared of every allegation. Loupe, a decorated Army veteran and Bronze Star recipient, said the ordeal caused tremendous stress, contributed to a stroke and ultimately forced him to retire. Former Cal/OSHA compliance officer Garrett Brown called DIR’s use of the fund “a huge slush fund” and “a stunning breach of public trust.”

The spending extends well beyond the Loupe investigation. DIR paid Sacramento-based Shaw Law Group $317,786 from WCARF to conduct employee investigations and has yet to produce records showing that the fund was reimbursed. More than $20 million in contracts also went to CPS HR Consulting, now headed by former DIR Director Katie Hagen. DIR maintains that using one fund initially and later transferring costs to the appropriate funding source is common practice. Yet despite repeated requests, the department has not demonstrated that the workers’ compensation fund was actually repaid. It now says it expects to provide an update by September 7.

These revelations are especially maddening given the well-documented problems within Cal/OSHA. A recent state audit found severe staffing shortages and significant failures in the agency charged with protecting California’s workers, including thousands of inadequately investigated cases and approximately 1,800 cases closed without referral for possible criminal prosecution. At the same time, former Cal/OSHA employees who raised concerns about staffing, pay and agency operations have alleged that they faced retaliation and internal investigations. DIR apparently had substantial resources available for consultants and investigations of its own employees, even as Cal/OSHA struggled to adequately investigate serious workplace injuries and deaths.

CAAA has grown increasingly frustrated with Cal/OSHA and DIR’s failure to put California’s workers first. Injured workers and their advocates are continually told about limited resources, staffing shortages and administrative challenges, yet DIR apparently found millions of dollars in a fund dedicated to the workers’ compensation system to pay for consultants, human resources projects and investigations of its own employees. Workers’ compensation funds exist to administer and strengthen the system serving injured workers, not to function as a convenient source of money for unrelated departmental expenses. California’s workers deserve a Department of Industrial Relations that treats those resources, and its responsibility to protect working people, with far greater care.

09/07/2026

This Labor Day, CAAA honors the workers who built California and the injured workers who deserve dignity, care, and support when an injury keeps them from doing the job they depend on.

We remain committed to protecting the rights of injured workers and ensuring the workers’ compensation system works for the people it was created to serve. Happy Labor Day from CAAA!

08/31/2026

California Supreme Court Delivers Decision in the Mayor Case

The California Supreme Court has rejected the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board’s practice of extending its own 60-day deadline to act on petitions for reconsideration. In Mayor v. Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board (Ross Valley Sanitation District), the Court held that once the 60-day deadline under Labor Code Section 5909 expires, the WCAB generally cannot extend that deadline because of administrative delays. The Court said allowing the Board to routinely toll its own deadline could lead to open-ended delays in resolving workers’ compensation cases.

The case involved the applicant Joseph Mayor, who was injured while working for the Ross Valley Sanitation District in 2013 and was found permanently and totally disabled in March 2023. Ross Valley Sanitation District timely filed a petition for reconsideration, but the petition was not transmitted to the WCAB within the required period. The Board ultimately granted reconsideration 144 days after the petition was filed, saying an administrative irregularity prevented it from receiving the petition and that the deadline could be extended under the 1992 decision in Shipley v. WCAB.

The Supreme Court rejected the WCAB’s reliance on Shipley, explaining that the earlier case involved an injured worker whose petition had been misplaced and raised specific due process concerns. While the Court acknowledged there may be limited circumstances where due process permits the WCAB to act after the deadline, it said Shipley cannot be routinely used as a workaround for “recurring, systemic” administrative problems. The Court emphasized that Section 5909 is intended to prevent reconsideration petitions from languishing before the Board.

The decision is especially significant for injured workers who face lengthy delays while waiting for their cases to become final. Joseph Mayor had been awarded permanent total disability benefits, but the reconsideration dispute left his award unresolved for years. The Court also held that an affected party can seek a writ of mandate to enforce the 60-day deadline rather than waiting indefinitely for the WCAB to act. Other remedies include filing a writ of review 45 days after the 60 days to issue a decision expires if you are the petitioner, or sending a letter to the board demanding a dismissal of the petition for reconsideration and a request to reinstate the judge’s order or award if you are the respondent. Although the Legislature has since changed when the 60-day period begins (it now runs from when the trial judge transmits the case to the appeals board under Labor Code 5909), the decision sends an important message that administrative problems should not leave injured workers and their benefits in legal limbo.

08/24/2026

Hidden in Greenhouses: 270 Farmworkers Found in Unsafe Housing

The owners of a Monterey County nursery have pleaded no contest to criminal charges and agreed to pay $800,000 in penalties and restitution after authorities discovered 270 people living in unpermitted and unsafe housing on their property. Nicolas and Ana Ruvalcaba, owners of Ruvalcaba Nursery in the Watsonville area, faced charges including tax evasion, housing code violations and failure to carry workers’ compensation insurance.

According to reporting from Monterey Now, the case began in 2023 when a probation officer noticed that someone under supervision appeared to be living in a greenhouse on the 23-acre nursery property. An inspection uncovered dozens of makeshift residential units carved out of converted greenhouses and other structures, housing approximately 270 people. Residents alleged the units lacked basic necessities including heating, smoke detectors, emergency exits, adequate ventilation and potable water, while some were reportedly infested with mold, roaches and rodents. Raw sewage was also reportedly discharged outside the units. Despite the conditions, some families who had lived on the property for years were reportedly paying as much as $2,500 per month in rent.

Residents also alleged that the Ruvalcabas took steps to hide the living arrangements from authorities. Families said they were discouraged from having visitors, monitored while on the property and told to keep themselves and their children inside. Some residents reported being threatened with eviction or deportation if they were seen outside, while a civil lawsuit alleged that residents were confined to the property or locked inside when government officials arrived for inspections.

The case is another troubling example of the vulnerability agricultural workers and their families can face in California. Farmworkers perform some of the state’s most physically demanding and essential work in raising temperatures, often while confronting low wages, a severe shortage of affordable housing and fear of retaliation when asserting their rights. When an employer or property owner can exert control over both a worker’s livelihood and housing, that vulnerability can become even greater. For the workers living on the Ruvalcaba property, those vulnerabilities were compounded by the absence of required workers’ compensation coverage, leaving them without a critical safeguard if they were injured while performing already physically demanding and often dangerous agricultural work. Our farmworkers deserve so much better.

08/17/2026

SF Contractor Charged with Workers’ Comp Fraud After Employee Loses Finger

A San Francisco construction company owner and manager are facing multiple felony charges after prosecutors allege they underreported payroll, failed to pay required taxes and insurance premiums, and attempted to deny workers’ compensation benefits to an employee who lost a finger in a workplace accident.

San Francisco District Attorney Brooke Jenkins announced Aug 7 that Declan McKevitt and Grace McKevitt, owners and managers of An Dun Construction, were arraigned on charges including workers’ compensation premium fraud and payroll tax fraud. Both pleaded not guilty. D. McKevitt also faces 2 additional insurance fraud charges for allegedly making a false statement to deny compensation and discouraging an injured worker from claiming benefits or pursuing a workers’ compensation claim.

According to prosecutors, the alleged scheme came to light after an employee severely injured his hand on a table saw, resulting in an amputated finger. Rather than acknowledge the workplace injury, prosecutors allege D. McKevitt told the worker to deny that the injury was work-related when seeking medical treatment. He then allegedly denied that the worker was employed by An Dun Construction and claimed the employee was at the jobsite without his knowledge. Payroll records and witness statements reportedly showed that the worker had been employed by the company for approximately 7 months. The alleged false denial delayed the injured worker’s benefits for four months.

The case is a reminder that workers’ compensation fraud does not begin and end with injured workers. Employer premium fraud, payroll fraud, misclassification and efforts to improperly deny legitimate claims can deprive workers of benefits while shifting costs onto the workers’ compensation system as a whole. Yet employer fraud routinely receives a fraction of the public attention devoted to allegations of fraud by injured workers. When an employer allegedly conceals payroll and then attempts to erase an injured employee from its workforce after a catastrophic injury, that deserves at least the same level of scrutiny.

Address

1303 J Street, Suite 420
Sacramento, CA
95814

Opening Hours

Monday	9am - 5pm
Tuesday	9am - 5pm
Wednesday	9am - 5pm
Thursday	9am - 5pm
Friday	9am - 5pm

Telephone

+19164445155

Website

http://www.caaa.org/

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when California Applicants' Attorneys Association posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Contact The Organization

Send a message to California Applicants' Attorneys Association:

Want your organization to be the top-listed Government Service in Sacramento?