Cliff M. Palefsky

Palefsky is widely regarded as one of the leading employment and civil rights lawyers in the country. He has participated in a number of landmark decisions and helped draft several pieces of legislation.

He also has testified before Congress and argued cases before the California Supreme Court as part of a 30-year crusade against mandatory arbitration agreements. The legally binding agreements bar workers from filing lawsuits against their employers for civil rights and labor complaints. Instead, they require workers to submit to arbitration procedures that are kept confidential.

While proponents of arbitration say it's cheaper and faster than the courts, critics like Palefsky say it favors employers over workers, hides employer abuses behind closed doors and does not allow for appeals.

"The academic world and all fair-minded people know that mandatory arbitration is a scandal in the house of justice. The Supreme Court is permitting it, but that doesn't take away the fact that it strips people of rights and is unethical, in my mind," Palefsky said.

In 2009 he testified before the House Judiciary Committee on the issue of whether mandatory arbitration is fair to employees. He argued seven arbitration cases to the California Supreme Court and helped write state legislation restricting its use.

And that's just some of the work he's done for free.

In his employment practice "day job," Palefsky represents nine plaintiffs in a pending class action against Microchip Technology. Berman v. Microchip Tech. Inc, 17-CV01864 (N.D. Cal., filed April 4, 2017). The plaintiffs accused Microchip of wrongly denying them severance benefits after acquiring their company, Atmel Corp. The court found the plaintiffs were entitled to severance and granted their motion for partial summary judgment.

While he declined to provide details, citing confidentiality, Palefsky also is handling a whistleblower case regarding an intoxicated doctor accused of causing the death of a patient. He called the incident an "institutional failure," as the death allegedly came after repeated complaints about the doctor's unsafe medical practices.

Palefsky prefers cases with strong public interest, where he can pursue not only justice for his clients, but also changes in policy and procedure.

"I am motivated by helping people, the justice aspect of it," he said. "I can read an article in the newspaper and say, 'That's just wrong,' and I figure out how to fix it. Sometimes I help draft and pass legislation. Sometimes I take cases. Sometimes I work with the media. But really it's using law as one of many tools to fight for social justice."

-- Jennifer Chung Klam