Ruth Zadikany

Ruth has extensive experience defending employers in wage-hour class actions and PAGA representative actions involving employee misclassification claims, meal and rest break violations, failure to pay overtime, work-off-the-clock, incorrect pay statements, rounding and expense reimbursement claims, and waiting-time and other penalties, as well as litigation involving wrongful termination, discrimination, harassment, and retaliation. Ruth also represents companies in a variety of other types of class and individual actions, such as actions involving enforcement or violations of restrictive covenants, as well as actions under the Fair Credit Reporting Act and the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

Ruth represents national and international employers in various industries, including airlines, financial institutions, real estate companies, retailers, insurance companies, manufacturers, technology companies, security defense contractors, and food industry clients. She works with clients to review and improve their employment practices and policies, prepare employment documents (including employment agreements, offer letter, arbitration agreements, and confidentiality and restrictive covenants agreements), develop and implement Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) programs, and to implement proactive strategies to avoid employment disputes. She regularly counsels and advises clients on day-to-day employment matters, including investigating sensitive sexual harassment and discrimination claims, enforcing restrictive covenants, making discipline and termination decisions, reductions in force, structuring compensation programs, and privacy-related issues. Ruth also advises on labor and employment matters in corporate transactions, including drafting language for purchase agreements, assisting with post-acquisition employee integration, and assessing due diligence materials. She also has experience advising employers in labor matters, including with respect to union elections, collective bargaining agreement negotiations, and effects bargaining negotiations. Ruth regularly contributes to the firm’s publications and client updates on key developments in the labor and employment area throughout the country.

Prior to joining Mayer Brown, Ruth worked as an attorney in the Labor and Employment practice group of a law firm in Tel Aviv, Israel, where her practice focused on traditional labor and employment litigation, executive compensation, and international transactions, including mergers and acquisitions.

• Reichel v. Fundraise Up Inc., 2025 WL 2653176 (C.D. Cal. Sept. 16, 2025). Secured dismissal with prejudice of a former account executive’s claims for gender discrimination, wrongful termination and unpaid commissions against her former employer.
• Armstrong v. USA Automotive Partners LLC, 2025 WL 1506223 (M.D. Tenn. May 27, 2025). Prevailed on a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction of a breach of contract lawsuit brought by a former employee.
• Home Point Fin. Corp. v. Lane, et al., 2022 WL 22866392 (M.D. Fla. Dec. 14, 2022). Represented a mortgage company in an action enforcing its non-solicitation of employees restrictive covenant and alleging claims for misappropriation of confidential information and breach of duty of loyalty in connection with a raid of employees by former employees and a competitor. Following an evidentiary hearing, the court granted a preliminary injunction against a former management employee who joined plaintiff’s competitor and extended defendant’s non-solicitation covenant for an additional 12 months, and denied the new employer’s motion to dismiss.
• Cushman & Wakefield U.S., Inc. v. Jonathan Napper et al. Case No. DC-22-14175 (Dallas County Dist. Ct., 2022). Represented a brokerage company in a high-profile lawsuit against two former brokers to enforce their non-competition and non-solicitation restrictive covenants. Secured a temporary restraining order and then, following an evidentiary hearing, a preliminary injunction enforcing the non-compete.
• Dockery v. Citizens Telecom Services Company, LLC, 2023 WL 2752482 (E.D. Cal. Mar. 31, 2023). Secured dismissal of all nine causes of action alleged in a wage-and-hour class and collective action complaint filed by a former employee and denial of plaintiff’s motion for conditional certification of an FLSA collective action.
• Confidential Employer (C.D. Cal. 2022). Represented defense contractor in a wage-and-hour class action and PAGA representative action in which plaintiffs sought to represent a putative class of hundreds of employees and temps, alleging violations of California’s Labor Code requirements, including a novel theory regarding the payment of health and welfare benefits under the Services Contract Act.
• Confidential Employer (NLRB Charge, 2024). Successfully obtained dismissal of an unfair labor practices charge filed by the employee of a technology company with the National Labor Relations Board.
• Flying Food Group, LLC v. City of Los Angeles, et al., Case No. 2:23-cv-0146 (C.D. Cal). Represented food industry client in a lawsuit filed against the City of Los Angeles for exceeding its authority in connection with the Los Angeles Living Wage Ordinance (LWO), as well as in a parallel wage-and-hour class and PAGA action brought by the employee union for alleged violations of the LWO.
• Goldthorpe v. Cathay Pacific Airways, Ltd., 2018 WL 5307018 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 16, 2018). Represented airline in a wage-and-hour class action and PAGA representative action alleging violations of numerous California Labor Code requirements due to the alleged misclassification of pilots as exempt employees. Successfully obtained dismissal of numerous claims, including on the grounds of preemption by the Railway Labor Act due to the existence of a collective bargaining agreement.
• Confidential Employer (Virginia Circuit Court, Fairfax County, 2018). Represented defense contractor in an action alleging misappropriation of confidential information, breach of duty of loyalty, and defamation against two former employees in connection with false and misleading statements they made to the media in connection with the company’s operations.
• Confidential Employer. Defended gig economy company in a number of lawsuits alleging claims that it violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
• Mitchell v. Medtronic, Inc., 684 Fed.Appx. 624 (9th Cir. Mar. 21, 2017). Defended multinational manufacturer of medical device components in putative wage-and-hour class action, alleging failure to pay overtime based on improper calculation of “regular rate of pay” by failing to include meal period premiums in the regular rate. Successfully obtained dismissal of the overtime claim, which dismissal was unanimously affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
• Sultan v. Medtronic, Inc., 585 Fed.Appx.513 (9th Cir. Oct. 20, 2014). Defended multinational manufacturer of medical device components in putative wage-and-hour class action alleging various violations of the California Labor Code. Following successful dismissal of the claims, successfully moved to dismiss the plaintiff’s appeal in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.