Photo of Jonathan Slowik

Jonathan Slowik represents employers in all aspects of litigation, with a particular emphasis in wage and hour class, collective, and representative actions, including those under the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA). He has defended dozens of class, collective, and representative actions in state and federal trial and appellate courts throughout California and beyond. In addition to his core wage and hour work, Jonathan has defended employers in single-plaintiff discrimination, harassment, and retaliation cases, and in labor arbitrations. Jonathan also regularly advises clients on a wide range of compliance issues and on employment issues arising in corporate transactions.

Jonathan has deep experience representing clients in the retail and hospitality industries, but has assisted all types of clients, including those in the health care, telecommunications, finance, media, entertainment, professional services, manufacturing, sports, nonprofit, and information technology industries.

Jonathan is a frequent contributor to Proskauer’s California Employment Law Blog and has written extensively about PAGA on various platforms. He has been published or quoted in Law360, the Daily Journal, the California Lawyer, the Northern California Record, and the UCLA Law Review.

Jonathan received his B.A. from the University of Southern California in 2007, magna cum laude, and J.D. from UCLA School of Law in 2012, where he was a managing editor of the UCLA Law Review.

On July 23, 2025, President Donald Trump issued Executive Order 14319, which has the stated purpose of preventing the federal government from procuring A.I. “models that sacrifice truthfulness and accuracy to ideological agendas.”  The order specifically targets models that incorporate principles of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), asserting that such frameworks may compromise factual accuracy and reliability.
Under the executive order, federal agencies can procure large language models (LLMs) only if they: (1) are “truthful in responding to user prompts seeking factual information or analysis,” “prioritiz[ing] historical accuracy, scientific inquiry, and objectivity, and [] acknowledg[ing] uncertainty where reliable information is incomplete or contradictory,” and (2) are “neutral, nonpartisan tools that do not manipulate responses in favor of ideological dogmas such as DEI.”

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is channel-logo-300x300.jpg

In this episode of The Proskauer Brief partner Guy Brenner, who leads Proskauer’s D.C. Labor & Employment practice and is head of the Government Contractor Compliance Group, and Jonathan Slowik, senior counsel, Labor & Employment, in the firm’s Los Angeles office, discuss laws requiring employers who use artificial intelligence (AI) to conduct bias

If a recent survey is to be believed, managers’ use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools in making personnel decisions may be more extensive than their employers realize.  A survey of 1,342 full-time manager-level employees commissioned by ResumeBuilder.com revealed some eye-popping results.  Roughly 60% of respondents said they relied on AI to make decisions about direct

On July 4, 2025, President Trump signed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act into law—a budget reconciliation bill enacting several signature policies of the President’s second-term agenda.  Left on the cutting-room floor, however, was an ambitious attempt to prohibit nearly all state and local regulation of artificial intelligence (“AI”) for the foreseeable future.

The version