Source: https://www.lcwlegal.com/our-people/amit-katzir
Timestamp: 2019-04-23 20:32:26+00:00

Document:
Amit is an associate in Liebert Cassidy Whitmore’s Los Angeles office. He provides advice and representation in various labor and employment matters including appeals of discipline, labor negotiations and arbitration, unfair practice proceedings, and wage and hour compliance. Amit also defends against discrimination, harassment, retaliation, and wage and hour claims in federal and state court and before administrative agencies.
As a member of the Business and Facilities practice group, Amit has provided advice on project labor agreements and labor peace agreements, including related policies for hotel construction and operations on public land.
In addition, Amit specializes in benefits structuring and compliance, with an emphasis on retirement and healthcare benefits. His expertise in these areas covers CalPERS retirement and healthcare plans, ’37 Act systems, cafeteria healthcare arrangements, and the Affordable Care Act.
During law school, Amit was an extern with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Police Officer v. City (2017) – Civil Service Commission upheld the termination of a police officer for dishonesty and failure to disclose opioid prescriptions to supervisors.
Maintenance Worker v. City (2017) – City Manager upheld the termination of a maintenance worker for positive drug test following a vehicle collision.
Human Resources Employee v. City (2017) – Administrative Law Judge denied unemployment insurance benefits to an employee terminated for engaging in sexual relations with a coworker on the employer’s premises.
Police Officer v. City (2016) – Personnel Board upheld the suspension of a police officer who arrested a bystander for filming the officer.
Police Officer v. City (2015) – Hearing officer upheld the demotion of a police lieutenant for, among other things, inappropriate instant messaging with a subordinate employee.
The California Supreme Court issued a long-awaited decision in Cal Fire Local 2881 v. CalPERS, a case addressing whether the Legislature’s elimination of “air time” as an optional benefit for members of CalPERS unconstitutionally impaired a vested contractual right. Holding that the air time benefit was not entitled to constitutional protection, the Court took a pass on reviewing a much bigger question: Whether the so-called “California Rule” for modifying pension benefits should remain intact.
Federal District Court Strikes Down Affordable Care Act. What Now for Employers?
A federal district judge in Texas ruled last Friday that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate was unconstitutional and that the ACA’s other provisions were therefore also invalid.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.